HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 11/15/1977JOHN MANE
AGENDA
JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING
6:30 PM, CITY HALL
Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Billy Bye, Joan Meyers,
Dave Osterholt and Sidney Pauly
Dean Edstrom, Chairman, Richard Feerick,
Tim Pierce, Mike Pohlen, Roy Terwilliger,
Dennis Truempi, and Jerry Wigen
City Manager Roger Ulstad; City Attorney
Harlan Perbix; Planner Chris Enger; Finance
Director John Frane; Director of Community
Services Marty Jessen; Engineer Carl Jullie,
and Joyce Provo, Recording Secretary,
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1977
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEMBERS:
COUNCIL STAFF:
INVOCATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL
I. GOALS AND ACTIVITIES AS SUBMITTED BY CHAIRMAN OF THE DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION, DEAN EDSTROM
A. Summary report on Business Climate together with individual
reports
B. Transport:11,km
II. SPECIFIC CHARGES BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
INVOLVEMENT
III. ADJOURNMENT
Page 5853
Page 5858
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1977
AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
City Council meeting will
commence immediately following ,
adjournment of the joint meeting '
with the Development Commission
„di°
I. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
II. MINUTES OF THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, OCTOBER
18, 1977
PRESENTATION BY MRS. JEANNE PHILLIPS, EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM DIRECTOR, ON
THE PROPOSED COMMUNITY EDUCATION AND COMMUNITY RELATIONS PROGRAMS POLICY
IV. REPORTS nF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
Page 5875
Page 5883
City Council Agenda Tues.,November 15, 1977
V. ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS
Ay 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-35, rezoning properties back to Planned Page 5884
0/\ Study for I year or until time of Guide Plan update completion, whichever
occurs first
P. 2nd Reading of Orlinance No. 77-13, rezoning from Rural to 1-2 Park Page 5$17
g approximately 5 acres for office-warehouse use for Condor Corporation
0 and rezoning agreement
C s 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-28, approving rezoning from Rural to Page 5892
Of, R1-13.5 for approximately 66.6 acres consisting of 144 lots for Maple
Leaf Acres 3rd Addition by Jarip Corporation and rezoning agreement
P. Resolution No. 77-146, requesting a post office to be established in the Page 5899
City of Eden Prairie
VI. REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council members
B. Report of City Attorney
1. Update on Windslope Project (pi
C. Report of City Manager
1.0WAward bids for 4 Police Vehicles
2.0 (Hennepin Emergency Communications Organization
O. Report of Director of Community Services
1,A" Reconmendation to appraise Bublitz property
2.01 Recomnendation on Snowdrifters Trail
3. //Information alout potential funding of Purgatory Acquisition
In the northwest area (Edengate, Markum)
4 1,64 4. Cash Park Fee Policy ep-4v-/-
ty'Recommendation of the Parks, Recreation & Natural Resources
Commission concerning the acquisition of Wolf Property by the
Metropolitan Airports Commission
E. Report of Planning Director
1.,, Review and approval of Environmental Assessment Worksheet on
Cardarelle's Crosstown Industrial Park Project and Anderson's
Crosstown Park Project (Resolution No. 77-145, approving the
EAW and finding the Assessment Worksheet for Crosstown Industrial
Park and Crosstown Park a private action)
F. Report of City Engineer
1.4,c, Final plat approval for Country Vista (Resolution No.77-147)
Page 5900
Page 5903
Page 5911
Page 5913
Page 5915
Page 5918
Page 5919
Page 5921
Page 5944
City Council Agenda
- 3 -
Tues,,November 15, 1977
F. Report of City Engineer (continued)
2. reliminar Plan a royal for Minnesota D.S.T.S.P. 2744-28 'Page 5945
or improvements at TH 69 and County Roa eso ut on No.
77-148)
3.041.Accept Sanitary Sewer, Watermain and Storm Sewer in Lake Eden Page 5948
South Addition for City ownership and maintenance
4.AGranting of easement to Minnesota Gas Company for relocation Page 5951
of pressure reduction valve on Leona Road
G. Report of Finance Director
1.D-Payment of Claims Nos. 7360 - 7506 Page 5955
2.V Clerk's License List
Page 5959
NEW BUSINESS
ADJOURNMENT.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Eden Prairie City Council
FROM: Eden Prairie Development Commission
RE: Report of Activities
DATE: October 12, 1977
The Eden Prairie Development Commission (formerly the Eden Prairie
Industrial Commission) was reconstituted in the spring of 1977 by the
City Council of Eden Prairie. Its activities and purposes are specified
by Ordinance No. 79 as amended by Ordinance No. 77-4 and Ordinance No.
77-29.
The Development Commission has no activities which are, as such,
required to be performed. Furthermore, the Commission has not been
mandated by ordinance or by the Council to "pass upon" any particular
actions by the City or proposals to the City. However, in view of its
duty to advise the Council (Ordinance No. 79), at the request of
certain individual members of the Council as expressed at the Development
Commission's first meeting on May 5, 1977, and on its own initiative,
the Commission has commenced a number of activities. The purpose of
this report is to bring the Council up to date with respect to the
activities of the Commission and to make certain interim suggestions for
the consideration of the Council.
I. Business Climate
One of the concerns expressed to the Commission by members of the
Council was a feeling that in certain respects Eden Prairie did not
5X53
enjoy a favorable image in terms of its receptivity and responsiveness
to the needs and desires of business. This image was seen as a potential
impediment to the development of Eden Prairie in a desirable manner and
to the creation of a tax base which would sustain the cost of utility
and transportation systems already in place and necessary in the foreseeable
future.
As a consequence, the Development Commission has undertaken a
survey of the business climate in the community. The survey form has
been provided to representatives of businesses operating in Eden Prairie,
including representatives of industry, commercial and retail establishments,
financial institutions, builders, developers, real estate brokers and
large land owners. The survey seeks to establish the reasons for doing
business in Eden Prairie, positive attributes of the community and
problems which have been encountered in establishment and operaticn of
businesses in the City. The Commission intends to summarize the responses
in a report to the Council.
The Commission anticipates that to the extent positive attributes
of the business climate in Eden Prairie are highlighted in the Report,
these attributes can be used by both the public institutions and private
entities interested in Eden Prairie in attracting the type of business
and development that would enhance the quality of our community. To the
extent that problems are identified, the Commission may make recommendations
with respect to substantive matters or procedures which might alleviate
the problems.
II. Transportation
Transportation has been identified as one of Eden Prairie's major
problem areas. The apparent problem is the inadequacy of the transportation
— 2 — a
system for the present and future needs of the community. The underlying
problem is financing needed construction. Financing difficulties, :in
turn, have resulted in certain difficulties in obtaining rights of way
and reaching agreement on assessments. Meanwhile, major arteries
through the community (Highways 5, 169 and 212) and many local feeder
routes remain in need of substantial improvement.
In this connection, the Commission has reviewed the transportation
'report prepared by the Eden Prairie Chamber of Commerce in the spring of
1977. In addition, it has discussed the report and various specific
problems with the City Manager, Roger Ulstad, and with the City Engineer
,
Carl Jullie. Certain members of the Commission also attended a meeting
held August 23, 1977 sponsored by the Chaska Chamber of Commerce which
focused on the problems involved in moving forward on the Highway 212-169
corridor project. The major speaker at this session was Jim Harrington,
Commissioner of the State Department of Transportation, who indicated
that inadequate funds on the state and federal levels had placed the
corridor development in a position of contending for funds with several
other major arterials and bridges in the metropolitan area.
The Development Commission believes that transportation must be one
of the City's highest priorities. Faced with problems of obtaining
funding, competing with other metropolitan areas for projects and
working with users and land owners presents the City with a momentOus
task. Nothwithstanding extraordinary efforts on the part of the staff,
with the support of the Council, progress has not been adequate. Conseq
u
e
n
t
l
y
,
the Commission recommends that the Council delegate to the Commission
-
3
-
certain specific duties which may serve to assist the Council and
t
h
e
staff. Among these might be the following:
1. Review of transportation priorities for Eden Prairie.
2. Represent the City in contacting officials at the county,
metropolitan and state levels in an attempt to speed up
authorizations and funding for projects benefiting the
community.
3. Assist in working with users, land owners, businesses and
residents in seeking resolution of difficulties arising with
respect to specific projects.
III. Taxation
In the area of taxation, the prime difficulty faced by the City of
Eden Prairie is the effect of the fiscal disparities law on tax rev
e
n
u
e
s
generated in the City. While in broad terms this is a simple suije
^
t
,
the details of the operation of the statute and the political ramific
a
t
i
o
n
s
are exceedingly complex. Other jurisdictions have considered the
i
m
p
a
c
t
of fiscal disparities and have considered remedial action and legislat
i
o
n
.
To date, Eden Prairie has been able to do little on its own initiativ
e
to achieve some relief from the impact of the fiscal disparities law.
It is the understanding of the Commission that the Eden Prairie Cham
b
e
r
of Commerce plans to undertake a study of taxation as it affects Ede
n
Prairie, with emphasis on the fiscal disparities law. The Commission
feels that in view of the willingness of the Chamber to undertake th
i
s
study and in view of the lack of adequate time and staff resources
available to the Commission itself, the Commission's study of this
subject should be deferred until the report of the Chamber of Comme
r
c
e
is available.
IV. Guide Plan
Because the work on the revised Guide Plan for the City was undertaken
well before the reconstitution of the Development Commission, the
Development Commission was not given any specific role in the formulation
of the Guide Plan. On an informal basis, and through various forums
which have been held in the Community with respect to the Guide Plan,
the members of the Commission are familiar with the procedures involved
in the development of the Guide Plan. It is the understanding of the
Commission that the draft of the Guide Plan is nearly complete and ready
for Council and community review. The Commission suggests that the
Commission be requested by the Council to review the Guide Plan and
give the Council and staff any suggestions or comments as would be
appropriate.
In any event, the Commission believes that the adoption of the
Guide Plan in the near future is essential to the City and its residents.
The development of the community and planning by its residents, landowners
and businesses will be affected to a great extent by the Guide Plan and
it would be unfortunate if meritorious proposals are discouraged,
delayed or defeated because of the lack of an up-to-date Guide Plan
which incorporates the needs and desires of the City and its residents.
V. Miscellaneous
The Commission has also reviewed and made suggestions to the City
staff concerning information for -new residents of the City (New Resident
Packets), Industrial Revenue Bond financing by the City, attracting new
business to the City, the City Sign Ordinance and Plying Cloud Airport.
- 5 -
6 ' 1
timid ,1
TO: City Council
RE: Community Survey Summary
FROM: Development Commission
At the joint meeting of the Council and the Development Commission, many members
felt that Eden Prairie did not enjoy a favorable image in the Business Community.
These concerns prompted the Development Commission's first charge - to survey the
business climate of the community.
The survey was accomplished by each member taking a section of the Business
Community and asking a set number of questions, a copy of which is attached. The
survey was held in the following areas of the business world: Building/Developing,
Financial, Major Businesses and Land Owners now in Eden Prairie and Real Estate
Companys.
To further our research the Commission felt each member should attend other City
Council Meetings around the Metropolitan area. This would enable them to see
how other Councils conducted their business. All reports and survey results for
each individual area are attached for your specific referral.
Almost unanimously, the prime reason for locating in Eden Prairie was Its rje oa r a phic
location. Areas to the north and east are developed so Eden Prairie is the next
natural place for growth to be felt.
Ratings of the Council, Commissions and Departments of the City were varied as
were the experiences of the persons being suxveyed. The general consensus was
a rating of "good".
The following are some suggested areas where improvements can be made, and some
of the general comments that were made during the survey:
Ease of Developing and/or Building in Eden Prairie was rated by many as "needing
improve me nt " .
Building Permits were cited as a problem due to the length of time necessary to obtain
one.
City needs better trained and more competent decision makers.
P.U.D. Development causes concern to lenders because added projects important
to thz: overall concept would later sometimes be disapproved and thus jeopardizing
the early Development loans.
Seems to be lack of trust in some areas between Council and Staff.
continued...
More credibility should be given to the Commissions.
It is hard to get Council to commit and make decisions.
Need a better understanding of business and proponent needs.
The City needs to do a selling job to make people feel wanted:
From the above comments you can see and feel the frustration that is evident. We
feel that whether the City likes it or not, it is in the Development Business. We,
the City, made a commitment to development when we installed City Utilities in the
early 70's. Now we must attract growth or the few people living here today will
have to pay the bill. Decision makes must face up to the reality that Eden Prairie
is not the only place to build in the Twin City Area. We must discourage the attitude
of "What are you Mr. Proponent going to do for the City?" and adopt the new attitude
."How can the City help you?".
We have a Guide Plan which has proved it can work and with a new updated Guide
Plan we should give it credibility and reliability so that all developers, proponents,
buyers and our citizens know where they stand.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Eden Prairie Development Commission
FROM: Dean R. Edstrom
DATE: October 24, 1977
RE: Business Climate Survey - Real Estate Developers
The following developers were contacted:
G. T. Mork & Co. Inc.
Busted Development Corporation
Edenvale Inc.
The Preserve
John Huston
Condor Corporation
Eagle Enterprises
Rauenhorst Corporation
Covenant Living Center
Of the foregoing, seven responses were received. The following summarizes
those responses.
1. The companies ranged in size from small to large in scale
and included developers of homesites and commercial and industrial
facilities.
2. Among the reasons for locating in Eden Prairie, City
services were considered good. Geographical location was the most
important reason for locating in Eden Prairie. The local labor market
and transportation were not major factors. Among other factors were
environmental considerations and community support for high quality
housing development and commercial and industrial needs.
3. The responding developers comprehended the entire scope
of development activities, and, following development, often continued
as owners of industrial and commercial facilities in the City. The
activities undertaken by these developers has had a'significant impact
in Eden Prairie.
4. A number of ratings and impressions were given with
respect to City institutions and processes:
(a) Planning and zoning procedures were rated from good
to poor. Comments were predominately critical, including reference
to delays of over two years from initial proposal to authorization,
the necessity to have completely detailed plans before authorizations
can be obtained, political red tape and lack of practicality regarding
development in Eden Prairie. Other comments were "confusing",
"ponderous and economically insensitive" and "clumsy, redundant,
unnecessarily elongated, unreliable".
(b) Building permit procedures were rated all the way
from very good to needs improvement. Two respondents rated these
procedures excellent. The most negative comment termed them "cumbersome
and expensive" and indicated that City charges are too high compared
with other communities. One response was "OK, but slow", another
noted that the department appeared to be understaffed, and a third
indicated that recent staff changes have been an improvement.
(c) Ease of developing and/or building in Eden Prairie
was rated fair to poor. Comments focused on the difficulty of
dealing with the length of the list of demands made on builders and
the fact that there is no complete checklist of requirements. One
characterized the City staff as "very demanding" while another has
"enjoyed our relationship".
(d) Taxation was rated fair and needs improvement, the
major objection being extremely high valuations which offset a low
mill rate.
(e) City services were rated very good to needs improvement.
Most developers seemed quite satisfied. Favorable comment was made
on the public safety and fire departments. Negative comment focused
on transportation facilities and widespread but under utilized
underground facilities.
(f) The general approval process was rated good to poor.
Negative comments used the terms "floundering", "difficult", "too
political". One respondent felt that "the process itself precludes
the initiation of quality development as opportunities are presented
within the City".
(g) Manager and staff were rated very good or good.
Comments included "accomodating and professional", "very fair and
honest", "inexperienced", "improving", and "needing greater council
Support".
(h) The community was rated very good to fair, with a
favorable emphasis. One respondent felt "the community is very
responsive to businesses and conducive to business expansion" while
another felt "older residents [are] extremely reluctant to allow
new uses into town - afraid of anything but single-family homes on
large lots".
q6, - 2 -
(i) City Council and Commissions were rated good to
needs improvement. Comments were quite negative and focused on the
unpredictability and inconsistency in the decision making process
and lack of receptivity Co business and development proposals. '
(j) Incentives to locate in Eden Prairie were rated as
fair, the location of the City being predominent. One said "location
is about the only thing Eden Prairie has going for it now", while
another cited "location, parks, good schools, good planning".
(k) Land use was rated very good to poor. Comments
focused on the political involvement in the process of developing
land use patterns, which was seen to be a negative factor in most
instances, and the preference of the respondents to have land use
determined more by the market place.
5. Suggested areas where improvements can be made included
the following recommendations:
"better understanding of business/developer needs"
- "speed up issuance of building permits"
- "Council should have more 'backbone' in dealing with some
residents who object to some types of development without
valid reasons"
"implementation of [the) walk-in, work-in and live-in
policies of the past . . . due to environmental and
energy advantages"
"the Council must leave the direction of school district
development within the community"
- "elect new Council with representation of newer citizens"
- "allow zoning commitments"
- "quit bleeding new-comers"
- "reduce commission reviews"
"objective reports to the community"
- "zone more property, have it in its inventory of zoned
real estate, and rely less on the planned unit development
concept"
6. Comparisons of Eden Prairie with other communities brought
a variety of comments ranging from a favorable comment with respect to
location, services and responsiveness to developers' needs, to negative
comments relating to development climate, transportation facilities, and
politization of the process.
7. General comments tended to repeat the comments made in
other sections.
- 3 -
From: Mike Pohlen
TO: Commission Members
Subject: SURVEY OF FINANCIAL COMMUNITY
Talking to the Financial Community did not lend itself to th
e
q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
s
suggested for determining the communLty climate of Eden Pra
i
r
i
e
.
N
e
v
e
r
-
theless, the following were contacted.
NWSW Bank, Bloomington
NW Bank, Hopkins
First National Bank, Hopkins
Suburban National, Eden Prairie
Midwest Federal Savings and Loan
Twin City Federal Savings and Loan
Dein, Kalman 6 Quail, Inc.
Piper, Jaffrey and Hopwood
Two Attorneys - bond counsel type
In most instances, the rating of Eden Prairie relative to other
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
was superior. Some specific examples which exemplify this
g
o
o
d
r
a
t
i
n
g
w
e
r
e
:
1. Bond was not needed for landscaping - took word of banker.
2. Inspection Department greatly improved.
3. Financial personnel very cooperative.
4. Staff very accomodating - better than average.
5. City Manager very easy to work with - not unyielding as man
y
a
r
e
.
6. Specials clerk responds promptly to requests.
7. Have specific set of gufblines for industrial revenue bonds
.
8. Eden Prairie has a lot going for it - keep it up.
Some of the things that were considered undesirable were as follows: (in
most instances, the people interviewed wanted it understood
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
s
e
i
t
e
m
s
were 2nd or 3rd hand and not personal experiences.)
1. PUP development causes concern of lenders because added proje
c
t
s
Important to the overall area concept could later be disapproved and
thus jeopardize the early development loans.
2. The zoning and development approval process seems to be too
l
e
n
g
t
h
y
-
some accomodating effort could be made during a persons first appearance
before a city body.
3. Seems to be lack of trust in some areas between council and staff.
4. Sometimes a lack of business sense by the council; little con
c
e
r
n
•
for the financial exposure of the developer.
5. Council could take the word of their experts at times and no
t
t
r
y
to be experts themselves.
6. Ordinances for the City may not be Adequate to serve the exp
a
n
d
i
n
g
needs of the City.
Generally, the results wore very positive. Most of these p
e
o
p
l
e
w
e
r
e
d
e
a
l
i
n
g
with projects a( ter they had seen there way through the Commissions and Council.
They felt Eden Prairie was better than most communities and complimen
t
e
d
t
h
e
StaffA3aM there cooperative spirit.
/kg,. ./Arn----
To: E. P. Development Commission
From: Mike Pollen •
Subject: Visit to Minnetonka Council Meeting, July 18, 1977, 6:30 p.m.
The meeting was begun promptly at 6:30 with two of seven members absent.
One member joined the others at 6:45 and the major left about 8:30 p.m.
and did not return. The seating of the council was widely spaced and did
not allow readily for back and forth consultation - each had a microphone.
Everyone talking to the council was required to come to a lecturn which
had a microphone attached. The recorder used a tape recorder to take the
minutes. An attorney and the acting city manager were in attendance and
were required to answer many questions. Also available were many staff
members. They made references often to regularly scheduled "work sessions"
for background information on issues and projects.
The agenda for the meeting was lengthy and a copy of same will be attached
to the chairman's copy of this memo. Most items were handled routinely
with votes taken when appropriate. The mayor voted on every issue. Citizens
were given an opportunity to comment on issues affecting them.
It was interesting to note that they changed from disapproval to approval
of a ernv:1 mining project during che meeting by simple discussion 141.1 the
applicant for the permit. There was lengthy discussion on a sign ordinance
and they seem quite a ways along on this problem. They gave final approval
to a zoning change and a proposed development project while they had six
council persons available because 6 of 7 was needed for the approval. It
did seem worthwhile to have seven people available for decision making.
In all, it was an orderly meeting with only one incident where a council-
person did not act in a very professional manner. Generally, I was impressed.
r
REPORT
PROM: TIM PIERCE
TO: DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MYMBETLS
RE: COMMUNITY SURVEY - BUILDERS
• This survey was held by personal and telephone interviews. The fol
l
o
w
i
n
g
i
s
a
list of the builders contacted:
Ban Con
Windsor H 0 1113 s
Pemtom
Trumpy Home.s, Inc.
Ecklund & Swedlund
Lundgren Bros.
Joe Semrad
Miller llamas
Eliason Builders
1. The size of the above builders ranges from 12 to 100 homes plus built p
e
r
year with some building townhornes and apartments.
II. The predominant reason for building in Eden Prairie is geographical loc
a
t
i
o
n
.
Areas to the north and east are developed so Eden Prairie is the natural
next place for growth to be felt. Transportation is second with the acc
e
s
s
to Highway 494 being mentioned as a good plus factor.
III. The degree of activity in Eden Prairie was as Builders and/or Land Develo
p
e
r
s
or persons considering building or developing in Eden Prairie.
IV. The impressions of the different City Departments are as varied as the ex
-
periences of the person being surveyed. General impressions are "good
t
o
very good", except for oLtaining Building Permits and the ease of develop
i
n
g
and/or building in Eden Prairie... These twa areas are in between "fair" an
d
"need improvement" .
V. The following are suggested areas of improvement and general comments:
A. Streamlining Energy Codes might help speed up Permits;
B. Co-ordination between Departments with regard to permits. Persons
surveyed didn't seem to think City Hall knew how long it takes to
obtain permits;
C. Mare credibility should be given to Commissions:
I. Projects reworked by Council;
2. Unknown factor of not knowing where you stand.
D. It is hard to get Council to commit and make a decision. Further delays
incurred when Council sends project back to Commission.
1 ,W '- E. There is much concern. about future of Schools and Bond Referendum.
F. It is difficult to take a risk with unkown factors being so great.
VI. When asked to compare Eden Prairie to other communities they are working
In or have worked in, Eden Prairie is always last. My feelings are that
the above comments are due to the fact that in Eden Prairie you never know
where you stand until you are in front of the Council. It would be good to
note that when a developer or builder does appear in front of the Council it
is usually two months or more after he has started through the process. To
have the Council requestion and redesign a project after it already as the
Commission's approval is very difficult for the developer or builder to under-
stand, especially when by the time they have reached the Council they have
already invested a great deal of time and money.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Eden Prairie Development Commission
FROM: Dick Feerick
DATE: September 20, 1977
SUBJECT: Community Climate Survey
A nuMber of business firms were contacted to solicit their comments
on our communities overall climate. The firms contacted included:
Rosemount
Eaton
MTS
Gelco
Water Products
Roll Tank
Lyman Lumber
Wilson Learning
FotoMark
Minnesota Tree
One of the major reasons for locating in Eden Prairie was geographic
location. This reason continually reoccurred with all of the firms
surveyed. Otr reasons such as labor market and transportation were
mentioned.
The responses on the surveys ranged from one individual who was com-
pletely satisfied with everything in Eden Prairie, to a number of
responses that raised questions and concerns, and to the pinpointing
of specific areas by several responses that indicated real concerns
or problem areas.
The survey forms will be provided for discussion at our next meeting.
One area that received-attention was planning and zoning procedures.
The planning and zoning procedures were noted as being tedious and
drawn out and lacking in sense of urgency. A number of four and five
ratings were present in this category.
The council and commissions were also mentioned in a number of replies
as being slow and unpredictable and slow to react. A number of four
ratings were present here.
Problem areas were noted as to roads and traffic, the need to consider
metal buildings, the PUD process being our biggest problem, and too
much system and bureaucracy. The comment was also made that the
council and commissions should work better together and place a greater
degree of reliance on staff recommendations. A statement by the Pres-
ident of MTS it also attached to this report because it indicates the
frustration a major business has experienced in our city and is probably
indicative of the reasons why he is locating his next major plant in
Chanhassen.
One final comment, the Comprehensive Guide Plan update has been in pro-
cess since the middle of 1975. This update is to revise the original
plan prepared in the late 60's and is suppose to address our planning
as well as applicable ordinances. ,%,t1
WHY MTS LOCATED IN EDEN PUAIRIE
Why Eden Prairie - MTS was a small
c
o
m
p
a
n
y
.
O
u
r
o
r
i
g
i
n
'
was a demerger from another company
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
i
n
E
d
e
n
P
r
a
i
r
i
e
.
It
was natural as a small company which had grown up in a small town
to be most comfortable remaining th
e
r
e
.
W
e
k
n
e
w
t
h
e
t
o
w
n
m
a
n
a
g
e
-
ment and they knew us. We respected the town needs, it
s
p
l
a
n
s
and they did ours. There was a mini
m
u
m
o
f
b
u
r
e
a
u
c
r
a
c
y
a
n
d
a
l
o
t
o
f
human respect, consideration, and und
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
.
As MTS has grown from three million
i
n
s
a
l
e
s
i
n
1
9
6
6
t
o
twenty-four million sales in 1976, we have maintained an objec
t
i
v
e
to "grow but stay small". We want t
o
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
o
u
r
s
i
z
e
f
o
r
m
a
n
y
reasons, but we work hard to mainta
i
n
t
h
e
b
e
h
a
v
i
o
r
(
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
v
e
n
e
s
s
,
involvement, and responsibility) of
a
s
m
a
l
l
o
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
.
I
d
o
n
o
t
honestly feel that the village, whic
h
b
e
c
a
m
e
a
c
i
t
y
,
h
a
s
g
r
o
w
n
i
n
such a way. I think bureaucracy has
s
e
t
i
n
n
o
t
i
c
e
a
b
l
y
,
t
h
a
t
human relationships have been separ
a
t
e
d
b
y
d
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
.
I
t
i
s
distressing and yet not unexpected.
We are still proud of our operation
h
e
r
e
a
n
d
w
h
a
t
t
h
e
c
i
t
y
has achieved and we will surely rem
a
i
n
i
n
E
d
e
n
P
r
a
i
r
i
e
-
b
u
t
w
e
are very seriously searching for a
"
s
m
a
l
l
t
o
w
n
p
l
a
c
e
"
t
o
u
n
d
e
r
t
a
k
e
future expansion.
/ feel that at the present time, the
r
e
i
s
t
o
o
m
u
c
h
s
y
s
t
e
m
between people who live in, operate
i
n
a
n
d
w
o
r
k
f
o
r
t
h
e
c
i
t
y
o
f
Eden Prairie. That system grows continua
l
l
y
unless it is planned
In other directions.
4(01
1
F. CLAYTON TONNEMAKER
5120 PENN AVENUE SOUTH. SUITE 546 • BLOOMINGTON.
M
I
N
N
E
S
O
T
A
5
5
4
3
1
•
1
5
1
2
)
E
I
L
1
B
-
1
2
B
0
August 3, 1977
Mr. Dean R. Edstrom, Chairman
Eden Prairie Development Commission
Doherty, Rumble & Butler
3750 IDS Tower
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Dear Dean:
I would like to give you a brief report on the Bloomington City
Council meeting T attended last night. I have enclosed a copy
of their agenda.
The Mayor started the meeting at 7:04 p.m., with 6 of the 7
Councilmen in attendance, plus the City Manager, City Attorney
and various staff members. The Mayor ran the entire 21 hours of
the wecting that I attended; I l'ailed out at 9:30 during a detailed
discussion of a sewer extension along West 94th Street.
My general impressions of the Meeting are:
1. The meeting Was conducted efficiently and expeditiously.
2. I sensed no animosity toward anyone between the Councilmen,
Mayor or staff. Everyone was treated with respect.
3. All private citizens that asked to speak on a particular
subject were treated with courtesy and the Council
appeared genuinely interested in their comments.
4. Correct parlimentary procedures were followed and only
once did I see a little confusion when 2 Councilmen were
discussing which motion should be voted on.
5. It appeared that a'couple of the Councilmen were self
appointed "fiscal watchdogs" and questioned most expenditures
that were brought before the Council.
I don't have a lot of Council watching experience on which to draw,
but based on what I do have I would give the Bloomington Council
an 8 on the 0 worst - 10 best scale.
PCT/ar
cc: Industrial Commission Members
City ManagerV INLIN• METALLIL: MINCRALS
ACQUISITIONS • CONLULTING • 1NVESTMENTS
MANAGEMENT
Since2y/t/
L t 4-?../71--•
F. Clayton 14Onnomaker
balt('
To: E. P. Development Commission
From: Mike Pohlen
Subject: Visit to Minnetonka Council Meeting, July 18, 1977, 6:30 p.m.
The meeting was begun promptly at 6:30 with two of seven members absent.
One member joined the others at 6:45 and the major left about 8:30 p.m.
and did not return. The seating of the council was widely spaced and did
not allow readily for back and forth consultation - each had a microphone.
Everyone talking to the council was required to come to a lecturn which
had a microphone attached. The recorder used a tape recorder to take the
minutes. An attorney and the acting city manager were in attendance and
were required to answer many questions. Also available were many staff
members. They made references often to regularly scheduled "work sessions"
for background information on issues and projects.
The agenda for the meeting was lengthy and a copy of same will be attached
to the chairman's copy of this memo. Most items were handled routinely
with votes taken when appropriate. The mayor voted on every issue. Citizens
were given an opportunity to comment on issues affecting them.
It was interesting to note that they changed from disapproval to approval
of a gravel mining project during the meeting by simple discussion with the
applicant for the permit. There was lengthy discussion on a sign ordinance
and they seem quite a ways along on this problem. They gave final approval
to a zoning change and a proposed development project while they had six
council persons available because 6 of 7 was needed for the approval. It
did seem worthwhile to have seven people available for decision making.
In all, it was an orderly meeting with only one incident where a council-
person did not act in a very professional manner. Cenerally, I was impressed.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Eden Prairie Development Commission
FROM: Dean R. Edstrom
RE: Burnsville City Council Meeting - September 19, 1977
I attended the meeting of the Burnsville City Council on
September 19, 1977. A copy of the agenda for the meeting is attached.
The meeting began promptly at 7:30 p.m. Four of the five
Council members were in attendance as well as the City Manager and three
or four other staff personnel. There were about fifteen in the audience.
The meeting was quite short and was adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
I was favorably impressed by the conduct of the meeting and
would note the following particulars:
1. The general tone of the meeting was friendly and helpful.
The mayor, who ran the meeting, went out of his way to
explain to other members of the Council, applicants for
action before the Council and the audience generally the
nature of matters that were under consideration, whether
or not particular questions or objections were being
raised. With respect to one applicant for a building
permit, when it became apparent that the construction
material proposed would not qualify under the City
standards, the Council and staff tried to be helpful, but
not critical, in suggesting both construction alternatives
and procedures which would expedite Council approval.
Ultimately, the matter was deferred to a later time on
the agenda, by which time the builder had developed a
solution which both he and the staff felt would be
satisfactory. The Council approved the building permit
subject to the use of three or four alternative specified
materials.
2. The meeting was conducted quite efficiently. The informative
introduction of agenda items and requests for motions by
the mayor resulted in a minimum of time lost in general
discussion and phrasing of motions. There appeared to be
a general dc:,irc to air the issues and reach decisions
with no desire to postpone matters to later dates.
o 7 /
3. The meeting was conducted in an informal and friendly
manner. The mayor, the members of the Council and the .
staff all addressed each other on a first name basis. •
Council members, staff and applicants spoke without
requesting recognition by the chair. Applicants and
members of the audience were treated very courteously.
4. A good working relationship with the City staff was
evident. The recommendations of the City Manager and
other members of his staff were obviously well received
and appreciated by the Council. On various matters the
ultimate action taken by the Council was, in fact, a
consensus reached among the individual members of the
Council and staff on an easy conversational basis. The
members of the Council were very complementary of the
work of the staff on various matters.
5. The Council chambers were very well appointed and uncluttered.
The use of microphones by the Council and by most of the
participants in discussion made the proceedings audible
to everyone in the room.
6. The members of the Council appeared to work very well
with each other. They appeared to have mutual respect
for each other's questions and ideas and were very
accomodating to the views of others. As a consequence,
all of the action taken was by unanimous vote. I would
not infer from this, however, that the Council members
were operating under the total guidance of the mayor or
the staff. Rather, each of them obviously had particular
ideas, concerns and wishes which were made evident and
taken into consideration in the course of the proceedings.
After the meeting I had an opportunity to chat with a few of
the Council and staff members. They indicated that the major issue of
recent concern in Burnsville has been dissention in the Public Safety
Department. These matters have been publicized in the metropolitan
press. They did not gcem to think that there were major problems in the
development area. Development has generally been permitted within the
scope of its guidcplan and zoning ordinance. The Council members and
staff seemed proud of the growth of Burnsville and they pointed out that
whereas Burnsville and Eden Prairie had fairly equal populations fifteen
or twenty years ago Burnsville now has a population nearly three times
the size of Eden Prairie.
A copy of the agenda for the meeting is attached.
TO: Eden Prairie Development Commission
FROM: Tim Pierce
SUBJECT: Maple Grove City Council
DATE: July 18, 1977
The following were my observations and feelings:
The Meeting was held in a very Informal nature. First names were prevalent
within the Council and also with the citizens and proponents.
Staff and Commission recommendations seemed to be accepted readily.
Reference was made to a Council work session held the prior week. Final
and preliminary plats and materials were handed out to the Members of
the Council at the meeting.
The City Manager took the role of explaining and defending City's decisicn:.;
and also very actively answered citizen's questions and concerns.
Cost et developing and type of lots are very comparable to Eden Prairie.
The Agenda for the City Council Meeting included the following paragraph:
"The City Council is provided background information for each agenda item
in advance from City staff a n d appointed commissions. Decisions are based
on this information and past experiences. Since we do not have time to dis-
cuss every point presented, it may seem that decisions are preconceived. If
you are aware of information that hasn't been discussed, please raise your
hand to be recognized. Comments that are pertinent are appreciated."
A short conversation with their City Manager left me with the impression th:It.
the City is growing in all directions. They issued 100 building permits in ti:e
month of June and have 2,000 single family lots coming before Council. Two
Shopping Centers are in the planning stages.
Business was conducted very efficiently yet cars wom available when citi:mns
raised concerns. A "Can Do" attitude seemed very evident within the Council.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Eden Prairie Development Commission
FROM: Richard M. Feerick
SUBJECT: Plymouth City Council Meeting .
DATE: . July 12, 1977
The City of Plymouth has the reputation for being a good location for development and
for running a very business-like operation. I had the opportunity to attend their
Council meeting Monday, July 11th.
The following observations were made during the course of the meeting:
First names were used throughout the meeting. Also many "Sirs" to those
speaking to issues.
The environment was one of courtesy. Speakers were thanked for their
comments.
Al Hilde (Mayor) was very sympathetic and provided explanations to the
public.
A problcm soh ;.g attitude was exhibited by the Council.
The City Manager took the vote call on all decisions. He was an active
participant at the table when discussion occurred.
The attitude was very business-like. Hilde would comment, "That's OK with
me, how about you guys?", or "How can we do this simply?"
Commission reports were referred to by Council.
Petitioners usually left in a happy frame of mind.
If a motion failed, the response was to secure an alternative motion that
would carry. The Council worked well together, (none felt a need to give a
speech). Hilde wmated as a facilitator, and they all attempted to
resolve all matters possible at the time of their meeting.
Plymouth's circumstances are different than ours, and there are some weak areas present.
However, I thought their Council's approach worth documentation.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1977
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
COUNCIL STAFF PRESENT:
7:00 PM, CITY HALL
Mayor Wolfgang Penzel, Billy Bye, Joan Meyers,
Dave Osterholt and Sidney Pauly
City Manager Roger Ulstad; City Attorney
Harlan Perbix; City Engineer Carl Jullie;
City Planner Dick Putnam; Chris Enger, Landscape
Architect, and Joyce Provo, Recording Secretary
INVOCATION: City Manager Roger Ulstad
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL: All members present.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
The following items were requested to be added to the agenda:
A. Reconsideration of the 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-19, Norseman
Industrial Park, rezoning agreement and preliminary plat
B. Purgatory rrepk Study request from the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission
C. Request for consideration by the Council from a property owner for
a hookup because of financial problems
D. Discussion of Chamber of Commerce request for a joint meeting with
the Council
E. Communication from the Chamber of Commerce regarding post offices
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, to approve the agenda as amended
and published. Motion carried unanimously.
II. CONTRIBUTION OF $2,500 FOR PARK SHELTER FROM THE LION'S CLUB
Mayor Penzel accepted a check on behalf of the City in the amount of
$2,500 from the Eden Prairie Lion's Club for the park shelter at Round
Lake. Presentation was made by Curt Connaughty, President, Mike Gust,
Past President, and Charles Tebelius, Secretary of the Lion's Club.
III. MINUTES OF THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER
20, 1977
Pg. 2, strike 4th para., and insert in lieu thereof: "Council directed the
Public Safety Department to conduct random surveillance of Eden Prairie Road
in an attempt to slow traffic down."
MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve the minutes of the
Regular Council Meeting held Tuesday, September 20, 1977, as amended and
published. Pauly, Osternolt, Bye and Penzel voted "aye", Meyers "abstained".
Motion carried.
';r1S
Council Minutes - 2 - Tues.,October 18, 1977
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. T.H. 5 & County Road 4, Planned Study Rezoning, consideration of properties
in the NE, SE and SW quadrants of the 4/5 intersection
City Manager Ulstad spoke to Planning Commission minutes dated September 26,
1977, explaining that notices have been sent to the affected property owners.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye, to close the Public Hearing
and approve the 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 77-35, rezoning the properties
In the NE, SE and SW quadrants of the 4/5 intersection back to Planned
Study for I year or until time of Guide Plan Update completion. Motion carried
unanimously.
V. REPORTS OF ADVISORY COMMISSIONS
No Reports.
VI. PETITIONS, REQUESTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Request from residents of The Preserve regarding Windslope
City Manager Ulstad explained that the City has received a request from a
number of residents in and around the Windslope project, and that a representative
of the residents is present to outline their specific request.
Mark Scholle, 8742 Leeward Circle, and Sandra Bell, 8730 Leeward Circle,
requested that the City Council dismiss the lawsuit against Windslope Associates,
et. al., regarding the exterior siding on the Windslope Apartments, as Windslope
Associates has offered the following residents a buffer of landscaping on
their properties: Violet Spear, Mark & Barbara Scholle, Thomas & Judith
Duke, Larry and Sandra Bell, Carl & LeeAnn Bisson, William & Margaretha Ebersole,
Melvin & Marie Root, Bruce & Patricia Zadach, James & Paula Rugloski, and
Carol Paul. Mr. Scholle also outlined the landscaping plan to the Council.
Douglas Rainbow, legal counsel for National Housing Partnerships, spoke to the
agreement, stating that he had presented one copy of the agreement to the
petitioners and one to City Attorney Perbix.
City Attorney Perbix commented that the City was not a part of any of these
discussions between the residents and Windslope, and did not participate in
nor encourage such action.
Mr. Retterath, 9011 High Point Circle, stated he has a great deal of sympathy
for the people who live adjacent to the Windslope project but feels the
people have been intimidated right from the beginning. He further explained
that there is a special committee which is called the Design Review Committee
that has not been made aware of anything that has taken place here this evening,
the people in the whole Preserve area have not been involved, and they are not
following the guidelines of the area.
Bye stated he finds the Council in a strange position in defending some people
who have given up and does not see it as the City's position at this time
to withdraw the declaratory judgement. Bye further commented he thought The Preserve
management should be in attendance when an action is requested of the Council on a
project in The Preserve.
Council Minutes - 3 - Tues.,October 18, 1977
A. Request from residents of The Preserve regarding Windslope (continued)
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye, to continue this item to the.
November 15, 1977 Council meeting, and to request the City Attorney to
outline the details of the lawsuit as to where we stand, direct staff to
negotiate alternate methods of funding the landscaping, and invite The
Preserve management to attend the November 15th Council meeting. Motion
carried unanimously.
Mr. Rainbow noted that if the City waits until November 15th, he doesn't
think the landscaping will go in before Spring.
Council requested that residents in The Preserve who signed the petition
received March 22, 1977, be notified that this item will be on the November
15th Council meeting.
B. Request from residents living on Leesborough Avenue, West 66th Street,
and Manchester Lane
City Manager Ulstad spoke to petition received from residents living
on Leesborough Avenue, West 66th Street, and Manchester Lane, petitioning
the City of Eden Prairie to install street lights to serve the area from
West 66th Street to Manchester Lane, Manchester Lane north of 66th Street and
Leesborough Avenue north of 66th Street.
MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Osterholt, to refer this matter to Staff
for a report. Motion carried unanimously.
VII. ORDINANCES & KESOLUTIONS
A. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-30, approving rezoning from R1-22 and I-General
to R1-13.5 and RN 6.5 for Vale Woods, Dirlam Properties, and rezoning agreement
City Manager Ulstad explained that all documents are in order and recommended
that the Council consider a 2nd reading of Ordinance No. 77-30.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye, to give a 2nd Reading to Ordinance
77-30, rezoning from R1-22 and I-General to R1-13.5 and RN 6.5 for Vale Woods,
Dirlam Properties. Motion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pauly, to approve the rezoning agreement
for Vale Woods with the following changes: add to item 2 on page 2, "a warranty
deed has been delivered to the City, and said Lot 16, Westgate Addition";
item 10, to read That the ownership of the unplatted lands shall be privately
owned."; and on page 3, item 4, strike"(19)" and insert "(18)". Motion carried
unanimously.
B. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-32, renaming Garrison Way to Amsden Way
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve the 2nd Reading
of Ordinance No. 77-32, renaiiiing Garrison Way to Amsden Way. Motion carried
unanimously.
C. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 77-36, amending Ordinance No. 186, pertaining
to the prevention and control of tree diseases.
Council requested the following changes before the 2nd reading: Section 1.,
Council Minutes Tues.,October 18, 1977
C. 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 77-36, amending Ordinance No. 186, pertaining
to the prevention and control of tree diseases (continued)
8th sentence, add at the beginning of the line"attempt to", after "control
and" insert "attempt to", strike "this disease" and insert "these diseases";
and add a severance clause at the end of ordinance with space for signatures.
MOTION: Bye moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve the 1st Reading
of Ordinance No. 77-36, amending Ordinance No. 186, pertaining to the
prevention and control of tree diseases,and that the changes as indicated
above be included in the Ordinance before the 2nd Reading. Motion carried
unanimously.
Pauly requested that Staff look into requiring the removal of dutch
elm trees prior to the issuance of a building permit.
VIII.REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
A. Reports of Council Members
No reports.
B. Report of City Mnager
I. Suburban Public Health Nursing Service
City Manager Ulstad spoke to Resolution No. 77-140, and recommended that
the Council consider adopting same.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye, to adopt Resolution No.
77-140, relating to membership in Suburban Public Health Nursing
Service, Inc. Motion carried unanimously.
2. Memo from the Development Commission
City Manager Ulstad spoke to memo from the Development Commission
as to the activities the Commission has been participating in. He
also explained that the Development Commission would like an opportunity
to meet with the Council in the very near future.
Dean Edstrom, Chairman of the Development Commission, stated the Commission
would like to discuss with the Council where they go from here and how the
Commission can best assist the City and Staff.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded Bye, to set Tuesday, November 15, 1977,
6:30 PM, for the Council to meet jointly with the Development Commission.
Motion carried unanimously.
3. Authorization to advertise for bids for 2 intermediate and 2 compact
size police vehicles
City Manager Ulstad explained that the term "intermediate" has been
scratched, and that the request is for the Council to authorize staff
to advertise for bids for 4 vehicles.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Bye, to authorize the advertisement
for bids for 4 police vehicles to be received on November 9th and awarded
on November 15th. Motion carried unanimously.
Council Minutes Tues.,October 18, 1977
C. Report of City Attorney
1. Helle lawsuit
Item LA., also considered at this point on the agenda.
City Attorney Perbix explained that he had a call from one of the Council
members inquiring as to how to get the 2nd Reading of Ordinance No.
77-19, Norseman Industrial Park, back on the Council agenda. Mr. Perbix
informed the Council member this could be done by a simple motion for re-
consideration by a member of the Council who voted on the prevailing
side. Mr. Perbix explained that he has an agreement signed by Mr. Helle
for submission to the Council should any one choose to consider it, and
what is spoken to is Alternate 5 and the construction of West 74th Street.
Mr. Helle is currently willing to give the land and construct the road
for West 74th Street. The only other change is that the City shall issue
a grading permit if approved by the City Engineer and, if necessary, the
Nine-Mile Creek Watershed District.
Bye read from Page 9 of the lawsuit which referred to himself as an individual,
and stated whatever action he may, or may not, choose to take, would be
on an individual basis. He further commented that the lawsuit can be
disposed of, but you can't dispose of the fact that it was said.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Osterholt, to reconsider the action
of the Council on October 4th regarding the 2nd Reading of Ordinance
No. 77-19, the rezoning agreement, and preliminary plat. Motion carried
unanimously.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Pauly, to separate the motion of October 4th
into 2 questions: 1) 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-19, and 2) rezoning
agreement. Motion carried unanimously.
Osterholt questioned that since the City is involved in a potential lawsuit,
could the Council ask for a recess to meet with the City Attorney to discuss
the lawsuit. Perbix stated this is a situation where the Council can meet
in private.
Penzel called for a 15-minute recess for the Council to discuss the lawsuit
with City Attorney Perbix and City Manager Ulstad.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Pauly, to approve the 2nd Reading
of Ordinance No. 77-19, Norseman Industrial Park, rezoning 16 acres from
Rural to 1-2 Park. Osterholt, Pauly, Meyers and Penzel voted "aye",
Bye voted "nay". Motion carried.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Pauly, to adopt the rezoning agreement.
Osterholt, Pauly, Meyers and Penzel voted "aye", Bye voted "nay". Motion
carried.
MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Osterholt, to adopt Resolution No. 77-43,
approving the preliminary plat for Norseman Industrial Park dividing 16
acres into 4 lots. Pauly, Osterholt, Meyers and Penzel voted "aye",
Bye "abstained". Motion carried.
Council directed the City Attorney to hold publication of the ordinance
until all documents are in order.
1)'1.79
Council Minutes - 6 - Tues.,October 18, 1977
1. Helle lawsuit (continued)
Claudia Bearman, 9955 Valley View Road, expressed her concern that
there was not a chance given for public discussion on this item.
Penzel explained there was no intention to disregard Mrs. Bearman's
concerns and they were all very carefully considered.
Council asked that those in the audience have a chance if they would
like, to review the rezoning agreement and ask any questions they de
e
m
necessary.
Upon review of the rezoning agreement, Mrs. Bearman asked if Mr. Hel
l
e
is going to assume the cost of the sanitary sewer and storm sewer, o
r
will the Bearman's and Hillger's be assuming the cost. Jullie respo
n
d
e
d
at this point Mr. Helle has not submitted a petition for sewer servi
c
e
and if he does and the Council receives the petition and orders a
feasibility study, a Public Hearing will be called.
D. Report of City Engineer
1. Consider bids for sewer and water improvements on Edenview I, Kutcher'
s
1st Addition and Kurtz Lane, I.C. 51-300 and watermain and street
Improvements on Homeward Hills Road, I.C. 51-309.
City Manager Ulstad explained that bids were received as advertised
Friday morning, October 14, 1977, and have now been tabulated and
sent to the Council for review. Bids outlined in communication from
Rieke, Carroll, Muller Associates, Inc., dated October 14, 1977.
City Engineer Jullie answered questions of Council members.
Ronald Hanson, 15809 South Eden Drive, questioned if the homeowners
would have the option not to hook up, and stated he was satisfied
with the figures quoted by RCM.
Jullie responded the homeowners would have the option to hook up; ho
w
e
v
e
r
,
if the homeowners have trouble with their system, the present City o
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
provides for one pumping then the property owners must hook up.
Tim Pierce, 15909 West 62nd Street, questioned if the work is not co
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
this year, would the price be fixed. Jullie responded that was provide
d
for in the bid documents as the cost would be firm through October of n
e
x
t
year.
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Bye, to adopt Resolution No. 77-141,
ordering sewer and water improvements in Edenview I. Kutcher's 1st Add
i
t
i
o
n
and Kurtz Lane, and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into
a
contract with Johnson Brothers Corporation in the amount of $655,401.5
0
,
and Brown & Cris, Inc. in the amount of $171,839.75, the lowest respon
s
i
b
l
e
bidders. Roll Call Vote: Meyers, Bye, Osterholt, Pauly and Penzel vo
t
e
d
"aye". Motion carried unanimously.
City Engineer Jullie explained that the City will be securing easemen
t
s
and would appreciate the cooperation of the property owners in proces
s
i
n
g
them as soon as possible.
Council Minutes - 7 - Tues.,October 18, 1977
2. Final Plat approval for Basswoods 3rd Townhouse Addition
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, to adopt Resolution ho.
77-142, approving the final plat for Basswoods 3rd Townhouse Addition.
Motion carried unanimously.
E. Report of Finance Director
1. Clerk's License List
MOTION: Meyers moved, seconded by Osterholt, to approve the Clerk's
License List dated October 18, 1977. Motion carried unanimously.
2. Payment of Claims Nos. 7127 - 7235
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Bye, to approve Payment of
Claims Nos. 7127 - 7235. Roll Call Vote: Osterholt, Bye, Meyers,
Pauly and Penzel voted "aye". Motion carried unanimously.
Osterholt stated he would like to have City property inventoried and
accounted for and felt someone should be charged with that responsibility.
IX. NEW BUSINESS
A. Reconsideration of the 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 77-19, Norseman Industrial
Park, rezoning agreement and preliminary plat
This item .as discussed under item VIII. C.1.
B. Purgatory Creek Study request from the Parks, Recreation & Natural
Resources Commission
This item was continued to the November 15th Council agenda to be discussed
and considered at that time.
C. Request for consideration by the Council from a property owner for a hook-
up because of financial problems
City Engineer Jullie spoke to Resolution No. 77-143, receiving 100% petition
and ordering sewer hookup at 18811 Duck Lake Trail, and explained the problem
the property owner is having.
Perbix requested that a "Whereas" clause be added to the resolution regarding
the health, welfare, etc.
MOTION: Osterholt moved, seconded by Meyers, to adopt Resolution No. 77-143
with suggestion by Perbix to be included in the resolution, receiving 100%
petition and ordering sewer hookup at 18811 Duck Lake Trail. Motion carried
unanimously.
Pauly requested that somehow a hardship be demonstrated, i.e., notarized financial
statement.
Cn I
Council Minutes - 8- Tues.,October 18, 1977
D. Discussion of Chamber of Commerce request for a joint meeting with
the Council
Council members requested that the Chamber of Commerce invite the
Council to meet with them.
E. Communication from the Chamber of Commerce regarding post offices
Council requested that this item be placed on a future Council agenda
In the form of a resolution.
City Manager Ulstad reminded the Council members of the Metropolitan Airports
Commission meeting on November 1st at the Vo-Tech School regarding Flying
Cloud Airport (Ordinance No. 51).
Council members requested that Mrs. Suel, MAC member, be called and told
that the Council meetings are held the first Tuesday of each month, and ask
if the MAC meeting could be postponed.
X. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Pauly moved, seconded by Osterholt, to adjourn the Council meeting
at 11:00 PM. Motion carried unanimously.
,;ya
• office of the superintendent district 272 • 8025 school rood • eden prairie, minn. 55343 • telephone (612) 941-6320 November 4, 1977
Mr. Wolfgang Penzel
Mayor of Eden Prairie
6932 Barberry Lane
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Mayor Penzel:
At its November 3 meeting, the school board reviewed a first draft
of a community education and community relations programs policy.
White the policy reinforces what the school district and city
originally sought in such a program, it also brings in the support
of good communications. Thus, the goal is to improve the community
educatiou program by doing what we said we wanted to do in the
first place.
To provide an in-depth explanation of this proposed policy, I am
requesting that you pnovide the school district with time on the
November 15 city council meeting agenda to enable Mrs. Jeanne
Phillips, the Educational Program Director, to briefly present
the policy with its underlying rationale. The ideas and input
of the city council regarding the policy would be greatly
appreciated.
Sincerely,
Robert A. Fallon
Superintendent
cc: City Council members
Roger Ulstad
Paul Enblom
Jeanne Phillips
whp/jh 11/8/77
ORDINANCE NO. 77 -35
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. _122
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Appendix A is amended by changing the classifications for
the property hereinafter described:
Subd. 1. Lot 27, Block 7, Westgate Addition according to the
plat thereof on file and of record in the Office of the Register
of Deeds, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which property shall be
and hereby is removed from C-COM zone and shall be included here-
after in the Planned Study (PS) Zone.
Subd. 2. All that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast
Quarter of Section 8, Township 116, Range 22, lying Northerly of
the following described line: beginning at a point on the East
line oi the said Quarter Quarter, distance 600 feet North of the
Southeast corner thereof; thence Westerly parallel with the South
line of the said Quarter Quarter, distance 800 feet; thence
Northwesterly to a point on the West line of the said Quarter
Quarter, distance 770 feet Northerly of the Southwest corner of
the said Quarter Quarter and there terminating, which property
shall be and hereby is removed from R1-22 zone and shall be
included hereafter in the Planned Study (PS) Zone.
Subd. 3. All that part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast
Quarter of Section. 8, Township 116, Range 22, lying Northerly of the
Northerly right-of-way line of State Highway No. 5 and Southerly
of the following described line: beginning at a point on the East
line of the said Quarter Quarter, distance 600 feet North of the
Southeast corner thereof; thence Westerly parallel with the South
line of the said Quarter Quarter, distance 800 feet; thence
Northwesterly to a point on the West line of the said Quarter Quarter,
distance 770 feet Northerly of the Southwest corner of the said
Quarter Quarter and there terminating, which property shall be and
hereby is removed from I-GEN zone and shall be included hereafter
in the Planned Study (PS) Zone.
Subd. 4. All that part el' the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast
Quarter of Section 8, Township 116, Range 22, lying Southerly of
the Southerly right-of-way line of State Highway No. 5, which
property shall be and hereby is removed from C-CON zone and shall
be included hereafter in the Planned Study (PS) Zone.
Subd. 5. All that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast
Quarter of Section 8, Township 116, Range 22, lying Southerly of the
Southerly right-of-way line of State Highway No. 5 and Westerly of
the Easterly 840 feet thereof, which property shall be and hereby is
removed from RM-2.5 zone and shall be included hereafter in the
Planned Study (PS) Zone.
Subd. 6. The part of the Westerly 840 feet of the Southwest Quarter
of the Southeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 116, Range 22,
lying Southerly of the Southerly right-of-way line of State Highway
No. 5, excepting therefrom a parcel described as commencing at the
Southwest corner of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter
of said Section 8; thence Easterly along the South line thereof,
distance 951.5 feet to a point known as point "A"; thence Northerly
at right angles to the center line of State Highway No. 5, said
point being the actual point of beginning; thence Southerly to
point A; thence deflect to the left 72 degrees, 0 minutes and
10 seconds to the center line of County Road No. 4; thence Northerly
along the said center line to the center line of said State Highway
No. 5; thence Northwesterly along said center line to the point of
beginning, which property shall be and hereby is removed from C-HWY
zone and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Study (PS) Zone.
Subd. 7. All that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter of Section 17, Township 116, Range 22, lying North of the
South 680 feet thereof, Southerly of State Highway No. 5, and
Westerly of the Northerly extension of the Easterly line of the
Lincolnwood Addition according to the plat thereof on file and of
record in the Office of the Register of Deeds, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, which property shall be and hereby is removed from C-COM
zone and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Study (PS) Zone.
Subd. 8. That part of Sections 8 and 17, Township 116, Range 22
described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of
Southwest 1/4 of Southeast 1/4, thence East along South line thereof
951.05 feet to a point known as Point A, thence North at right
angle to the center line of State Highway No. 5, said point being
actual point of beginning, thence South to Point A, thence deflect
left 72 degrees, 00 minutes 10 seconds to the center lineofCounty
Road No. 4, thence North along said center line to the center line
of State Highway No. 5, thence Northwesterly along said center line
to beginning, except roads, which property shall be included in
Planned Study (PS) Zone.
Subd. 9. Also the North 511.50 feet of the West half of the NE t of
Section 17, Township 116, Range 22, except that part thereof lying
Northerly of a line drawn Southeasterly at an angle of 17 degrees 00
minutes 50 seconds to said North line from a point thereon distant
951.50 feet East of the Northwest corner thereof, which property
shall be and hereby is removed from RM-2.5 and C-HWY zone and shall
be included hereafter in the Planned Study (PS) Zone.
-2-
/5 W./
Subd. 10. The East 217.8 feet of the West 959.8 feet of the South
300 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Section
9, Township 116, Range 22, Which property shall be and hereby is
removed from I-GEN zone and shall be included hereafter in the Planned
Study (PS) Zone.
Subd. 11. That part of the South 300 feet of the Southwest Quarter
of the Southwest Quarter lying East of the West 959.8 feet thereof
except the railroad right-of-way, Section 9, Township 116, Range 22,
which property shall be and hereby is removed from I-GEM zone and
shall be included hereafter in the Planned Study (PS) Zone.
Section 2. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage
and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie this Jay of , 1977 and finally read and adopted
and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said
City on the day of , 1977.
Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
Published in the Eden Prairie News on , 1977.
.3-
tw lo
whp/jr 7/12/77
Condor Corporation
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 77-83
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 135.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Appendix A of Ordinance No. 135 is amended by
adding to Section 12, Township 116, Range 22 as follows:
See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a
part hereof;
which property shall be and herehyis removed from Rural and shall
be included hereafter in the 1-2 Park zone.
Section 2. The above-described property shall be subject to
the terms and condition's of that certain Rezoning Agreement dated
, 1977 entered into between CONDOR CORPORATION
and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, which agreement is hereby made a part
hereof and shall further be subject to all the ordinances, rules and
regulations of the City relating to such 1-2 Park zone.
Section 3. This ordinance becomes effective from and after
its passage and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Eden Prairie on the day of , 1977, and finally
read and adopted, and ordered published at a regular meeting of the
City Council of said City on the day of , 1977.
Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
Published in the Eden Prairie News on the
, 1977.
day of
-2-
WHP/jr 7/12/77
REZONING AGREEMENT
1.-7 c;? THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this -2 day of
• 1977, by and between CONDOR CORPORATION, herein-
after referred to as "Owner", and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a
municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City",
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Owner has requested the City Council of the
City of Eden Prairie to change the zoning of a tract of land
from Rural to 1-2 Park for an area consisting of approximately
five (5) acres and which is legally described on Exhibit "A"
which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, and
WHEREAS, it is believed that the rezoning of said area to
1-2 Park would be in the public's interest, welfare and convenience
of the people of the City of Eden Prairie; and
WHEREAS, Owner agrees to develop the aforementioned property
in consideration of the City's changing of the zoning; and Owner
further agrees that as a part of said consideration, it will lay
out, develop and maintain said project as hereinafter set forth;
NOW, THEREFORE, this agreement witnesseth that for and in
consideration of the Mayor and the City Council of the City of
Eden Prairie adopting an ordinance changing the zoning from Rural
to 1-2 Park and of the mutual benefits to each of the parties hereto,
the parties, their respective successors and assigns do hereby
covenant and agree as follows:
1. That the requirements of Ordinance No. 135 shall be
adhered to as and for a building on the property.
building permit
2. That the owner at the time of platting dedicate to
the public for street purposes the north7-45 feet
the property described on Exhibit "A" as and for a
right-of-way for an extension of 74th Street.
3. That the owner is aware of and understands that not-
withstanding the dedication as set forth in 2 above,
their property may be subject to further assessments
for road improvements.
4. That the City Engineer receives and approve the grading
plans for the site as described on Exhibit "A" prior
to the second rating and that any such approval be
joined in by the abutting property owners.
5. That the developer will pay park dedication fees as
required by City Ordinances.
6. That all sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer
facilities, concrete curb and gutter and bituminous
surfacing whether to be public or private, shall be
designed to City standards by a Registered Professional
Civil Engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for
approval. The developer, through his engineer, shall
provide for competent daily inspection of all street
and utility construction, both public and private. As-
built drawings with service and valve ties on reproducable
mylar and certification of completion and compliance
with specifications shall also be delivered to the City
Engineer. The developer also agrees to pay all fees for
City Engineering and administrative services consistent
with current City requirements.
FURTHER CITY AND PROPERTY OWNERS AGREE:
1. That the property owners shall comply with all applicable
rules, regulations, ordinances and laws of the City of
Eden Prairie.
2. That the provisions of this Agreement shall be binding
upon and enforceable against Owner, its successors and
assigns, and upon all subsequent owners, their re-
spective heirs, successors and assigns of the property
herein described.
3. That an executed copy of this Agreement shall be re-
corded with the Register of Deeds, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
-2-
4. That if Owner fails to proceed in accordance with
this Agreement within eighteen (18) months from the
date hereof, Owner, for themselves, their successors
and assigns agree that they will not oppose the re-
zoning of said property back to its Rural zoning.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused
their presents to be executed the day and year aforesaid.
CONDOR CORPORATION
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal
corporation
(SEAL)
By:
Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor
J6hn D. Frane, Cify Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ).
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
day of , 1977 by Wolfgang Penzel, the Mayor
and by Roger Ulstad, the City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie,
a Minnesota municipal corporation on behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
( ss. •
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
-) eV/
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 4'.).--
, 1977, by T-P"er tZmialtAmY the., day of CIAroiseIc_
and by /6+40 SAA.ODA, the , %Is. . Y. p.
of CONDOR CORPORATION, on behalf of the cor oration.
-) 4 Rota
1
. blic
JOAN M. DARCKHOFF
CArival COUNTY
NOYARy Puuisc.mt“Nr9oTA
Ct...11.1111. ern." OCT. 13. $903
-
L3- ija'fl
whp/jh 11/9/77
Maple Leaf Acres 3rd Addn.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNE93TA
ORDINANCE NO. 77-28
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 115.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1, Appendix A of Ordinance No. 135 is amended by adding to
Sections 6 and 7, Township 116, Range 22,as follows:
That part of the South One-half of the Southwest Quarter
of Section 6 and that part of the North One-half of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 7, all in Township 116,
Range 22, lying East of a line drawn from a point on the
South line of said North One-half of the Northwest Quarter
distant 1268 feet East from the Southwest corner of said
North One-half of the Northwest Quarter to a point on the
North line of said South One-half of the Southwest Quarter
distant 1273.6 feet East from the Northwest corner of said
South One-half of the Southwest Quarter, except that part
thereof lying North of the center line of Town Road running
in a Northwesterly and Southeasterly direction through said
property, according to the Government Survey thereof,
which property shall be and hereby is removed from Rural zone and shall be
included hereafter in the R1-13.5 zone.
Section 2. The above described property shall be subject to the terms
and conditions of that certain Rezoning Agreement dated November 1977
entered into between Jarip Corporation and the City of Eden Prairie, which
agreement is hereby made a part hereof and shall further be subject to all
of the ordinances, rules and regulations of the City relating to such R1-13.5
zones.
Section 1. This ordinamwe becomes effective from and after its passage
and publication.
FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Ede
n
Prairie this day of , 1977 and finally read and
adopted and orderedpublished at a regular meeting of the City Council
o
f
- said City on the day of , 1977.
Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk
Published in the Eden Prairie News on the day of , 1977.
-2-
6'61.3
whp/jh 11/9/77
Maple Leaf Acres 3rd Addn.
REZONING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into in triplicate this day of
, 1977 by and between 3ARIP CORPORATION, a Minnesota corporation,
hereinafter referred to as "Owners", and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal
corporation of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "City",
WITNESSETH THAT
WHEREAS, Owners have requested the City Council of the City of Eden
Prairie to change the zoning of a tract of land from Rural to R1-13.5 for
approximately 66.5 acres and preliminary plat approval for 144 lots in Maple
Leaf Acres Third Addition, which is legally described as more fully set out
on Exhibit A which is attached hereto and made a part hereof; and
WHEREAS, it is believed that rezoning of said area to R1-13.5 will be
in the public interest, welfare and convenience of the people of the City of
Eden Prairie; and
WHEREAS, Owners agree to develop the aforementioned property as a
single family residential development in accordance with the above requested
zoning,
NOW, THEREFORE, THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH, that for and in consideration
of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie adopting an ordinance changing
the zoning from Rural to R1-13.5 as requested and of the mutual benefits to
each of the parties hereto, Owners do hereby covenant and agree as follows:
1. The driveway on Valley View shall be constructed with "T"
driveways to discourage backing on to Valley View Road.
2. Lot frontages on the following lots are enlarged to at
least 50 feet:
Phase C Block 1 Lots 3, 4, 9 & 10
3. Provisions of Ordinance 135, 111-13.5 District, are followed
with the exception of the lot size variances.
4. The intersection of Duck Lake Trail and Dell Road be approved
by the City Engineer Department,
5. A barrier be constructed at the east end of Valley View Road
to prevent vehicular traffic from using Valley View Road in
Hidden Ponds 1st Addition until Valley View Road is connected
to County Road 4.
6. A barrier be constructed at the south end of proposed Tartan
Curve to prevent vehicular travel onto site until Tartan Curve
is completed.
7. Erosion control measures be taken during construction on all
disturbed slopes greater than 12 percent. Sodding and seeding
should immediately follow construction.
8. The small marshy area to the west be drained, excavated and
backfilled with a coarse material to insure an adequate
building pad. The developer should also consider installing
drain tile around the footings for houses built in the
10.-r areas.
9. The developer study the grading plan in an effort to reduce
the amount necessary.
10. A bicycle/pedestrian trail system be built on Duck Lake Trail,
Dell Road and Valley View Road. The paths along Dell Road and
Valley View Road shall be 6 feet wide and constructed of 4
inch deep strength asphalt. The trail along Duck Lake
Trail will be 8 feet wide and constructed of 4 inch deep
strength asphalt. These trails will be built by the
developer in the right-of-way.
11. Cash park fee to be paid according to Ordinance No. 332 at
time of building permit.
12. That the plat be developed in accordance with the plat, a
copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof
marked Exhibit B.
13. That all sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer facilities,
concrete curb and gutter and bituminous surfacing whether to
be public or private. shall be designed to City standards by
a Registered Professional Civil Engineer and submitted to
the City Engineer for approval. The developer, through his
Yo-r) -2-
engineer, shall provide for competent daily inspection
of all street and utility construction, both public and
private. As-built drawings with service and valve ties on
reproducable mylar and certification of completion and
compliance with specifications shall also be delivered
to the City Engineer. The developer also agrees to pay
all fees for City Engineering and administrative services
consistent with current City requirements.
City and Property owners agree:
1. That the property owners shall comply with all applicable
rules, regulations, ordinances and laws of the City of
Eden Prairie.
2. That the provisions of this Agreement shall be binding
upon and enforceable against Owner, its successors and
assigns, and all subsequent owners, their respective
heirs, successors and assigns, of the property herein
described.
3. That an executed copy of this Agreement shall be recorded
:4:101 the Register of Deeds or the Registrar of Titles for
the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota.
4. That if Owner fails to procure a building permit in
accordance with this Agreement within 24 months from the
date hereof, Owner will not oppose a rezoning of said
property.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused their
presents to be executed the day and year aforesaid.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal
corporation of the State of Minnesota.
BY:
Wolfgang Penzel, Mayor
John D. Franc, City Clerk
JARIP CORPORATION, a Minnesota corporation
BY:
laki G
-3-
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1977 by Wolfgang Fenzel, Mayor and John D. Franc, City Clerk
• of the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation under the laws of the
State of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1977 by and
of Jarip Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public
-4-
68')
EXHIBIT A
That part of the South One-half of the Southwest Quarter
of Section 6 and that part of the North One-half of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 7, all in Township 116, Range 22,
lying East of a line drawn from a point on the South line
of said North One-half of the Northwest Quarter distant
1268 feet East from the Southwest corner of said North
One-half of the Northwest Quarter to a point on the North
line of said South One-half of the Southwest Quarter distant
1273.6 feet East from the Northwest corner of said South
One-half of the Southwest Quarter, except that part thereof
lying North of the center line of Town Road running in a
Northwesterly and Southeasterly direction through said property,
according to the Government Survey thereof.
RESOLUTION NO. 77-146
A RESOLUTION URGING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A UNITED
STATES POST OFFICE FOR EDEN PRAIRIE
WHEREAS our United States Post Office would provide greatly enhanced mail
service to the thirty-six square mile community of Eden Prairie;
WHEREAS our United States Post Office would optimumly serve the Eden
Prairie and West Bloomington areas;
WHEREAS our United States Post Office would support both the regional
commercial and regional employment centers located in Eden Prairie;
WHEREAS our United States Post Office would be strategically located at
the transportation hubs of 494, 169, and 212;
WHEREAS our United States Post Office would provide a stronger community
identity to Eden Prairie;
WHEREAS our United States Post Office would utilize the now assigned zip
code for Eden Prairie;
THEREFORE, BE IT SO RESOLVED that the Eden Prairie City Council strongly
endorses the requirement for a United States Post Office to be
located in Eden.Prairie at the earliest possible time.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL on the day of , 1977.
Wolfgang Fenzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Franc, City Clerk
SEAL
November 10, 1977
TO: Roger Ulstad)
FROM: Keith Wall e
SUBJECT: Police Vehicle Bids
After reviewing the attached tabulation of bid prices and compliance
with listed specification, we would recommend award of bid to the
following:
North Star Dodge 116" minimum wheel base 2 vehicles = $9855.74
Bloomington Chrysler/Plymouth 111" minimum wheel base 2 vehicles = $10,124.70
cild0
y24.1„7-7,, pz;.-4.., 4:46
1.
.3.
)
4. /&-v' r•A...):://)1< ( I
1.
Bid Opening November 9, 1977 For two- police vehicles, 111" minim= wheel base
• /e),
, 6. at,/ ()
/e),
7. / 6(`-7(--.)
1
999.
-
9.
10.
11.
12.
5: ...:20N-t /4 ‘32;7,
lt,„P 91 L,
6. ,//)&,,c.., . 24 t(
Bid Opening November 9, 1977 For two police vehicles, 116° minimum wheel base
(/ 1.
,i --- 1=1.v Jitt,
"
/e), .1./P4/
2. c>ILI27/724 -4./_ /7> r cyl -q
3. / /i—e-cticla_'_y Ec---(
4 00
7. vLi7k...66c. :))/o
8. '
,7)
fy
920. 6, 4/
)
590;2,
November 10, 1977
TO: Roger Ulstad
FROM: Chief Jack Hackin
SUBJECT: HECO Funding
As you know, the Hennepin County Emergency Communication Organization,
of which we are a member, has for some time been reviewing the problem
of a confused, overcrowded emergency system in our county.
There are presently 13 radio dispatch facilities in Hennepin County, some
of which dispatch to but three to four vehicles while the Sheriff's center
dispatches to as many as 70. It has been said that this system, which
we use also, could be considered a danger to officers who depend on it.
As a result, the attached agreement describes the need for HECO to conduct
a study for the feasability of grouping communities together and sharing
radio frequencies. I feel that itt imperative for our community to
participate in this study because the Sheriff's system will become increas-
ingly crowded in the next two to three years.
I would appreciate your assistance in requesting funds be made available
for the project by our City Council.
HENNEPIN
SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT
6 Courthouse
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415
Don Omodt, Sheriff
October 28, 1977
Mr. Roger Ulstad
City Manager
City of Eden Prairie
8950 County Road 4
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Attention: Director of Public Safety Jack Hacking
Dear Mr. Ulstad:
The Board of Directors of the Hennepin Emergency Communicatlons
Organization (RECO) met on Thursday, October 20th. The main purpose of
HECO is twofold: First, we must prepare for the advent and implementation
of 911 telephone service. We can report to you that a work program has been
adopted, and we are proceeding on schedule and satisfactorily in this
regard. The second main purpose is to work toward a plan to better utilize
the scarce and precious radio frequencies available to the several public
safety organizations in Hennepin County. The HECO Agreement contemplates,
at least, some consolidation or combination of police and fire dispatch
facilities. A target date of July 1, 1978, is established by the MECO Joint
Powers Agreement for a decision on this aspect. To date, we have made
little progress towards a resolution.
It is imperative, we believe, that HECO now commence an engineering
study from which, among other things, we can best combine or consolidate
some or all of the several dispatch operations and make better use of the
existing frequencies. The HECO Executive Committee is in the process of
preparing a Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA) grant request
for the funds necessary to finance an engineering study that will recommend
alternative methods of achieving the objectives of HECO. The estimated cost
Is $60,000. There is some doubt whether HECO will be able to get the grant
funds, not because of any questions regarding the importance and desirability
of this project, but rather because of prior commitments of the funds. It
seems that the best that HECO can hope for is the use of reversionary funds,
that is, funds that have already been allocated for some project but have
not been spent. We do not expect to receive a definitive answer to the
grant request until July 1978.
In the meantime, we believe that it is in the best interests
of the entire County that we proceed with the engineering study so that
we can have the information available before next July, (1978). and be
able to make the necessary decisions. If this is done, it is possible
that immediate substantial savings in the 911 installation, and recurring
cost of dispatching can be accomplished.
HENNEPIN COUNTY
on equal opportunify employer
DON OMODT, PRESIDENT
HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF
JOHN PIDGEON, VICE PRESIDENT
BLOOMINGTON CITY MANAGER
.Veyo-Le/.Z.--4 4•
Mr. Roger Ulstad
Page 2 October 28, 1977
The Board of Directors has directed the Executive Committee to
seek financial commitments from each of the members. Some money will be
needed and soon. If the grant request is unsuccessful, all will be needed.
If we get the grant, the direct cost to the members will be less. The
Executive Committee has evolved a formula for payment of the amount necessary
which we are calling "1978 dues". This is not to be construed as an ongoing
amount. The formula is as follows:
POPULATION NO. OF MEMBERS 1978 DUES DUES x NO.
Over 50,000
40 to 50,000
30 to 40,000
20 to 30,000
10 to 20,000
Under 10,000
3
3
4
3
3
5
$5300
$4400
$3500
$2600
$1700
$ 800
$15,900
$13,200
$14,000
$ 7,800
$ 5,100
$ 4 000
$60,000
The Board of Directors will meet again on November 23, 1977. We
need to have your commitment, as well as all others, by that date. We trust
that this will allow adequate time for City Council consideration and action.
If any of us can be of help with additional information, please advise. Or,
you can get assistance from John O'Sullivan, Director of Hennepin County
Criminal Justice Coordinating Council, telephone 348-6497, or from Jim
Brekken, wits is on loan to HECO from the Bloomington Police Department. He
can be contacted through Mr. O'Sullivan's Office or at Bloomington, 884-3591.
If we do not receive the necessary commitments on November 23rd, some
members, because of immediate and pressing needs, will go ahead on their own
with what we consider a piecemeal engineering study. We do not believe a
limited study will be in the best interests of all, but we understand it
may be necessary considering the special needs of these member communities.
Very truly yours,
HENNEPIN EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS ORGANIZATION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
A % - ) !
THOMAS A. THOMPSON / -I--
ASSISTANT CITY COORDINATOR, MINNEAPOLIS
.(71MES WILLIS, SECRETARY TREASURER
PLYMOUTH CITY MANAGER
.Drrtiitzt
DONALD DAVIS
DIRECTOR, SOUTH LAKE MINNETONKA PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT
DO:ehs
Enclosure
-
HENNEPIN EMERGENCY COIDRIN!CATIONS ORGANIZATION
BOARD OF DECTORS
unicipality
City of Bloomington
2215 West Old Shakopee Road
Bloomington, Minn. 55431
City of St. Anthony
3301 N. E. Silver Lake Road
Minneapolis, Minn. 55418
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, Minn. 55423
City of Mound
5341 Maywood Road
Mound, Minn. 55364
City of Plymouth
3025 Harbor Lane
Plymouth, Minn. 55441
City of New Hope
4401 Xylon Avenue North
New Hope, Minn. 55428
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Road
Minneapolis, Minn. 55427
City of Brooklyn Park
5800 85th Avenue North
Brooklyn Park, Minn. 55443
City of St. Louis Park
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, Minn. 55416
Village of Excelsior
339 Third Street
Excelsior, Minn. 55331
City of Shorewood
20630 Manor Road
Shorewood, Minn. 55331
City of Hopkins
1010 First Street North
Hopkins, Minn. 55343
Director
John G. Pidgeon
City Manager
James Fornell
City Manager
Wayne S. Burggraaff
City Manager
Leonard L. Kopp
City Manager
James G. Willis
City Manager
Marlyn G. Larson
City Manager
James Crawford
Director of Public Safety
R. M. Henneberger
City Manager
John Elwell
City Manager
Donald E. Davis
Director, South Lake Minnetonka
Public Safety Department
Donald E. Davis
Director, South Lake Minnetonka
Public Safety Department
William Craig
City Manager
bHti n Itt.
DECO BOARD OF DIRECTORS (Continued) Page 2
Municipality
City of Edina
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, Minn. 55424
City of Minneapolis
311 City Hall
Minneapolis, Minn. 55415
City of Eden Prairie
8950 County Road 4
Eden Prairie, Minn. 55346
City of Orono
Box 66
Crystal Bay, Minn. 55323
City of Minnetonka
14600 Minnetonka Boulevard
Minnetonka, Minn. 55343
City of Crystal
4141 Douglas Drive *imrth
Crystal, Minn. 55422
Hennepin County
Room 6, Courthouse
Minneapolis, Minn. 55415
A2309 Government Center
Minneapolis, Minn. 55487
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, Minn. 55430
City of Maple Grove
14310 93rd Avenue North
Osseo, Minn. 55369
City of Rohhinsdale
4221 Lake Road
Robbinsdale, Minn. 55422
Director
Robert Buresh
Director of Safety
David Niklaus
City Coordinator
Thomas A. Thompson
Associate City Coordinator
Jack Hacking
Director of Public Safety
Walter R. Benson
Administrator
Robert Grewell
City Manager
John T. Irving
City Manager
Don Omodt
Sheriff
(Dave Duryee, Room #6)
and
Dale C. Folstad
Director of Management Services
• Gerald Splinter
City Manager
Robert A. Erickson
City Administrator
John F. -Fischbach
City Manager
HENNEPIN EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS ORGANIZATION
TO: All HECO Members
FROM: Staff
DATE: November 2, 1977
SUBJECT: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The following material was developed at the request of the Executive Committee
for your use when presenting the request for dues to your governing board.
Police communications, or more precisely the effective use of radio technology,
has been a subject of discussion and controversy ever since the two-way radio
was first used by police. As the technology and equipment have become more
sophisticated, generally, the police became more adept at making full use of
these resources. However, in recent years technological advances have not been
fully used due to extremely high costs and, perhaps more importantly in our own
jurisdiction, the limited number of radio frequencies has severely hampered the
implementation of changes which could insure a more effective use of radio tech-
nology. At the present time there are a number of agencies in Hennepin County
that are sharing police radio frequencies which are so congested by normal use
that the full benefits of two-way radio systems are not possible. In simple
terms, no additional frequencies are available and alternative solutions must
be found.
The most straightforward solution is the redistribution and sharing of the avail-
able radio frequencies. This sharing can take the form of two or more adjacent
communities sharing a single radio frequency with each maintaining its own dis-
patching center; or there can be "clustering" in which two or more communities
share a radio frequency and use one dispatching center with the costs of dis-
patching being shared among the participants; or there can be full consolida-
tion where all public safety dispatching takes place in one center and all com-
munities pay a fair share of the operating costs.
Even though the solution seems simple, there was no mechanism whereby the vari-
ous communities in the county could cooperatively institute change without
peripheral issues such as parochial interests, competition among agencies and
suspicion as to motives getting in the way. The result was a lot of talk and
speculation, but no action.
In response to these problems, the Hennepin County Criminal Justice Council
Communications Steering Committee initiated a series of planning activities
which resulted in a recommendation to create an organization wherein all members
participated as co-equals with adequate safeguards to assure user control.
The organization that evolved was the Hennepin Emergency Communications Organi-
zation (HECO), a joint power organization with 23 member units of government
which range in size from the city of Medicine Lake to the city of Minneapolis.
November 2, 1977
Page Two
A review of the joint power agreement highlights why HECO was created. It
was created to plan for the "reallocation and the greater sharing of the
frequency channels available..."; to explore the feasibility "to have the
several existing dispatch facilities consolidated into a lesser number, with
one centralized facility possibly providing enhanced public safety services
and the best opportunity for application of current and future technological
developments"; to develop "a plan and operating procedures for an integrated
and coordinated public safety communications system which includes county-
wide 911 telephone service...."
In addition, the agreement provides a means to operate such a center or centers
should that be the decision of the HECO Board and to assess the operating
costs to the participating members based upon an established formula.
HECO as an organizational entity exists and appears theoretically able to
make significant improvements in public safety communications but, like a
rocket without fuel, it is a very static achievement. Just as the rocket
needs fuel to do the job for which it was intended, HECO needs "fuel" to ac-
complish results. The "fuel" needed for HECO is a mixture of participation,
cooperation and resources.
Each member of HECO has been asked to consider a request for dues to under-
write the cost of conducting a study which will, among other things, determine
the future of HECO. To begin to make system improvements, HECO needs a great
deal of information and advice which will serve as the basis for decisions by
individual members and as the basis for recommending detailed operational im-
provements. The study is crucial if system improvements are to be made.
The issues facing HECO can be summarized as follows:
1. Some radio frequencies are currently overloaded to the extent that
the quality of service is marginal. The County system is now at
this point.
2. Some radio frequencies in the county are underused.
3. When frequencies are licensed by an agency they are literally "owned"
by that agency.
Therefore, it is logical to conclude that a reallocation or sharing of frequen-
cies is necessary and that any sharing or reallocation will require the willing
cooperation of those members who currently control radio frequencies.
4. Capital costs of dispatching equipment continue to increase and most
of the present radio dispatching centers will require significant
investments for new equipment within three to six years. By reduc-
ing the number of dispatching centers through clustering or consoli-
dation, it is possible to minimize the impact of capital spending
for dispatching equipment.
November 2, 1977
Page Three
5. By reducing the number of dispatching centers and by instituting
a procedure wherein each community pays its fair share of the dis-
patching costs, it is likely that the cost to each agency will be
more equitable and, in some cases, the cost per agency will actually
be less than its current expenditures for public safety communica-
tions.
The following will be included in the study.
1. Community profiles will be developed which will reflect the current
and projected public safety communications needs of each community.
2. An inventory and description of the current use of all radio fre-
quencies available for public safety purposes.
3. Professional engineering services will be provided to: evaluate
existing radio and dispatching equipment, recommend reallocation
of frequencies, recommend system improvements, recommend cluster
or consolidation arrangements (technical aspects), assist in dispatch
center site selections and design of facilities, develop specifica-
tions for modifying existing equipment for use in consolidated or
cluster center, revise county 911 plan to conform with system changes,
es.,,luate equipment needs, and assist in developing detailed imple-
mentation plans.
Several alternative methods of system. Improvement will be described as options
for consideration by the .HECO members with each alternative including a des-
cription of its general operational features.
At the last HECO Board meeting a question was raised as to the status of the
potential for LEAA funding for this purpose. The Executive Committee has directed
staff to continue the preparation of such a grant request; however, you should
be aware that at the time the HECO Executive Committee approved the work pro-
gram, there was a strong likelihood that LEAA funding would be available for
at least the first year of operation of HECO. Within the last few weeks, that
situation has changed to the extent that it is now virtually certain that LEAA
funds will not be available for a grant to operate HECO. Therefore, if HECO
Is to produce any results, the members must demonstrate their commitment to
improving public safety communications by underwriting the start-up costs and
this project directly by dues or other contributions.
JMB:bjr
6110
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
THRU: Roger Ulstad, City Manager
FROM: Marty Jessen, Director of Community Services /1/j
SUBJECT: Communication from Jim and Audrey Bublitz concerning lan
d
f
o
r
sale along Purgatory Creek
DATE: November 10, 1977
Attached is a copy of a brief letter from Mrs. Bublitz ad
d
r
e
s
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
i
r
desire for the City to proceed to appraise and negotiate
a
n
o
p
t
i
o
n
t
o
acquire their property similar to the one which was enter
e
d
i
n
t
o
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
Hustad's and Brown's during the review of the Bluff's Dev
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
.
On Monday, November 7, 1977 the Parks, Recreation and Nat
u
r
a
l
R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
Commission took action that the City appraise this proper
t
y
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
n
t
of securing an option to buy.
im
im &
Audrey
r---
't •
. •..... •
••
‘0•-t- ‘ .1%:n (' t s.i.‘N.\-1\ ,...L n \\ t .‘x \ ,,k , :...,.1 , cs1 QC 10 Ci)v..) Z
.,....,,.. I _ .,‘ . t .,i 1/4 '.:0,-V4C.71 \'‘\,n '..T.A\ \ V ( .4-,%\\SA
CS,..0)\\•;;‘• .Sn n' _\!_r ...• • _:.....\'''.4 _e...,
..y:
•\
.......‘ . ...'
T. TA. .
T....-\%..)-7. "....7....T :%....)...:T ...". N \' \ - -
(C n "n::\\7:
\
7.+Vj Tr-...7.-"..'••: ''''''' l',.:'•J: ''
l. '- . ,n
.-----.... •
'-•-.----....„......___'••\ IA
•
er.
ublitr • Ten Seven Twenty County Road ri 3 O,teen
Edon Prairie • Minnesota 55.143 • 612444-2143
1.•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
THRU: Roger K. Ulstad, City Manager
FROM: Marty Jessen, Director of Community Services/U .
SUBJECT: Request by Snowdrifters Snowmobile Club to sponsor Trail Grant
Application.
DATE: November 10, 1977
I've been contacted by a member of the Snowdrifters Club concerning their
desire to apply for Minnesota DNR funds for marking and grooming of a
snowmobile trail in the City. The club has previously secured easements and
authorization from the property owners to establish such a trail and the grant
.request would be for purchase of signs and for grooming of the trail during
the season. The club would do all of the work in conjunction with the signage
and grooming. The City's only responsibility would be to serve as the agent
to make the application and channel the funds on through to the Snowmobile
Club.
On November 7, 1977 the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
recommended that the City serve as the sponsor for the Trail Grant Application
per the general alignment shown on the attached map, subject to the condition
that no tax money be expended on implementing the trail.
2 3 I 4 5 6 1___I_81__1____L9__.±___
.S.,...1.4-•:1-1c—c•-14..,.. $-..,4----....-7-7::
M.. ROY
.,...,
.../174....t(i i • t/de I "...... 1
,S,...". ' -..i •-asr
.:::.. ' I.N! • •
il / 4:. ' , .r, l•
.a k...,4 •,1.‘ , , ..._ _
4400 f\y47.4. I ', 1 , :‘. , ‘ .
3 u,--- 0
., • ,...., ..._.,---- • • ,......., .,.. A', 1 „....4, _7. \ r
..). ....: ./.' ..;', "., •,•,....„,:',. ' ''.' ,r•
.
..,.• ‘,,,• .,..-- . .• • / t,,,t ' 4......
`7,„;„A ..., ,....: ;•.,:°, / .- ,,.-ji, ;,,:--- 'iv --.• P
f " : i L.IL.,-.,--:`1:-,,. • 4 ./ i 4 n *•,-,...--- ,--r , •,--,,,..
.....
)
:1-
''1,:.,,,el, ,:,',.:... - . ".-.,..... •V ,.....,,,, t
.ito'cl. 1 ; :.n, '''....." 1 > . ;...`-:" .. ...' '''..'_: :I 1 :."2."- _4 7..: - 1
7...44. .14...... ;.....„7.14...71 n••41.j ,.... ,
V.V.. : • , Crn N /.--4-41
....-1- ..,.,„, ,. f 1 L.-..• _...... , \._ /2' •,:.. i woo s.....s -- • •-'
"''" '
0 .1.--•••i-....:. 1:,01 '
-"it-. .."' i t'...,"-..z•V i
I N --.7.7?;.).,,, /. ,'•'' ,, /...',:)/ ‘... .. ,,:it.„.,k,.,..i, ",, ..\•... 1
-.4""%i ) i . / P, ,.., ' "I;• ".-',.',...- c.,n -,4-.:s• •:'7,-fr9 r41 ,
L, ' .,k
1 C; (:›- PAL-`rise- /&44.14D441 .eArs 6viou›,--b6;ke
/977-19 tRcJ.';');`1
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
Marty Jessen, Director of Community Services d41..1
Potential Funding to Purchase Land in Duck Lake Trail
Sector of Purgatory Creek--Edengate 4 Markum
November 4, 1977
As implied in your action of September 19, 1977, I have begun an
investigation as to the availability of acquiring these properties.
There is no government grant funding available right now to use in
purchasing these parcels. With that basis I have begun to explore
the possibility of "borrowing" money to use now in purchasing the land.
A couple of possibilities exist with the 2 best options as follows:
1. METROPOLITAN PARKS FOUNDATION - A non-profit corporation
primarily intended to "advance acquire" land for parks.
The Foundation is receiving the "conservancy zone gift"
from the Hustad's for later conveyance to the City. The
Foundation acquires the land and holds it for the public
agency to buy later at an agreed upon rate and conditions.
They are reimbursed all costs including principal, interest,
taxes, and miscellaneous (legal, appraisal, etc.). One of
the conditions of the agreement could be receipt of grant
funding from an outside source by the Cit. The obvious
advantage to .this arrangement is the fact that the City
would be able to pay "today's prices" plus actual costs
rather than an inflated land value at a later date.
2. "AN EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS FOUNDATION" - This could be of much
value over the years in the continued implementation of the
of the City's Parks System. The goal and purpose of the
Foundation would be to accept gifts and arrange financing for
parks projects where City funding is not currently available.
The obvious advantages of the Metropolitan Parks Foundation are:
. It's all set up and ready to go.
. They have previous experience in getting this kind of deal done.
Preliminary conversations with Clif French, Secretary to the Foundation,
lead me to believe that we could secure financing if the City is willing
to enter into a suitable agreement.
The question then becomes one of where does the City get the money to
"pay off" the Foundations "loan" at a later date. These options have been
discussed at length earlier during the review of the Purgatory Creek Study
during 1974/75 (?). The conditions have not changed significantly since
then. The Purgatory Creek Corridor is identified on the Metropolitan
) (over)
-2-
Trails System Plan as a Regional Corridor. Federal LAWCON funding could also
be applied for to assist in purchasing this land. Finally, the Riley/Purgatory
• Creek Watershed District could also assist in the purchase. The likelihood of
funding (at least partial) is good. If the City needs to pay a portion of the
purchase price the Commercial/Industrial CASH PARK FEE ($1,200/ acre) could be used.
)gr
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
• THRU:
- FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Roger K. Ulstad, City Manager
Marty Jessen, Director of Community Services/01. J.
Purgatory Funding
November 10, 1977
On Monday, November 7, 1977 the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
Commission reviewed the attached memo on potential methods of generating
"immediate money" for purchase of land along Purgatory Creek. They asked
that I bring this matter to you on your November 15 Agenda for information
and discussion.
5.90
•
r!.s.1U 17.t.CiLJD
r.11:•2r4:7....10TA
C C31 ; 041 -1(':.c10
r•:0 •1 77-70-1
cvvral November 9, 1977
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Roger K. Ulstad; City Manager
Marty Jessen, Director of Community Services
Don Brauer, Brauer & Associates, Inc.
Cash Park Fee Applied To Edenvale and
Preserve PUD's
Our records are quite sparse on the subject of the review of the
Edenvale and Preserve PUD's because we did not make formal reviews
for the City at that time.
We did some "staff" work (calculations of areas and some checking
in ownerships - copies of which you have in City files), and I did
meet informally with George Hite on several occasions to discuss
the proposals. My recollections at this time are based on notes
in my Day Timer books.
1. I see no re son why the City Council cannot change, terminate
or initiate new policies at any time, subject only to the
"reasonable" test.
Given that posture, there is no reason why the Preserve and
Edenvale should not be expected to abide by new policies from
the Cate of that new polity.
2. I have reviewed Marty Jessen's calculations of PUD contribution
and development values measured against the CASH PARK FEE re-
quirements today, ,ind have no basis for disagreeing with the
approach, the values, or the conclusions, with one exception
as follows:
a. The Edenvale PUD covered some 270 acres of previously zoned
land. That area included 120 acres of golf course land
zoned M2 (General Industrial). Brauer & Associates, Inc.,
had previously recommended (informally agreed to by the
Simes I believe) that M2 was inappropriate and should be
changed to the designation recommended in the 1968 Compre-
hensive Plan for privately owned and operated public use
recreational facilities (Quasi-Public).
b. The 150 acre balance, however, was that area between TM 5,
the railroad and Purgatory Creek. Most of that (130 acres)
was zoned Special Industrial, and 20 acres was zoned (and
partially occupied) M2. Because all of the land along TM 5
was subject to acquisition by condemnation for improving
TH 5, it was decided that it would be most unfair (if not
confiscatory) to remove that zoning classification when
acquisition seemed reasonably possible. The Plan Study
designation was "invented" to help those owners "preserve"
the former value in Case highway acquisition occurred.
57/1
.lessen -2- Novei,ber 9, 1977
c. The 150 acre area was also consistent with the uses proposed
in the Edenvale PUD. New zoning was required only to make
the classification consistent with the new zoning ordinance
systems. A new plat was also required, but again, this was
an improvement of an existing condition, not a totally new
proposal.
3. Eased upon this analysis I would revise the Edenvale calculation
as follows:
OTHER LAND USES
223 acres x $1,200 = $267,600
less 150 acres (previously zoned) x
$1,200 = $180,000
Total $537,600
This would compare to Marty Jessen's calculation of $571,000 as
the value of existing and proposed public and private recreation
land and facilities in the PUD area.
4. Summar ,'
With the one modification outlined above it seems that both major
PUD's have (or will) measure up to the requirements of the CASH
PARK FEE ordinance..
The question of "values" assigned to land and facilities is, of
course, one of judgement rather than fact. The figures which
have been used seem reasonable and appropriate.
Since the Value of the land and facilities in the original PUD
proposals exceed the income which could be derived from an appli-
cation of the CASH PARK FEE, I recommend that the City elect to
continue to enforce the original PUD concept of dedication and
construction of facilities rather than application of the CASH
PARK FEE for Edenvale and the Preserve.
dgbA
5911
- 2 - 2.7), '
B. Ra-uts of Stff
- 1:o1f Pronerty
Jessen sieohe to past presentation by Pr. Jim VOyen representing the
Y•tropelitan Mr;,ort wiIh discu:sion of posUble purchnse
fras, the Frasar 3cool of the cif proyyrty by LAC for additional flight
cicarince, end of offer to the City on use of the land as a son•apectator,
low dtnsity r,7crcation arca.
Jensen oontined that he had talked with ropresetatives from the
Brensing and Ferris Co. concerning the yossibility of the peiential
use as a golf caurze/ski bill recreation arcs. Cpan *ace or recraa-
"Lion uses are conon as a land use for canitary landfills after they
are conpleted, he added. Le spoke to the study begun by the County
for additional sites for sanitary landfill v:.orations throunhout the
Caunty, and that they era presently lc.:..hing In F.P. es a possible
location for another landfill site.
Erell questioned hrw a alri hill would he aocom:olished. Jessen res-
Ion:'..A that ,n additional 100 feet would ha added to the completed
laa61ill reea, acopitching a 250 ft. elevation of the hill.
E , .-11 y..onnibility of collecting the netbane as
that %.otld be aocv:allating, for the purpose of nring it as ra enargy
nstaaa. Jcssen felt that could be Accenplished with the counsel of
the Earcau of Land Reclamation Daparte:ant.
Asinrson ached what kind of ti:Ya fr .le nes on this Irojeat. Jessen
res -:anded about six to eight y:-:.es eacp7eYon, added that the
oif Iro:aerty is undtr aonsidr2ation P2W.
Pecause of sinilarity of subjects, Jcsson spoke to the Cet'er hills
Golf and 5;:i y.espatal, an offer rade by the won- to sell 300 acres,
cc,1117.-
at and i:.,neeva::ents inalt"cd, for ;,S30,030. add that
the City on that land W33 for 1.2 million dollars, and
he fclt coUld he raised out of revenue bet:de, with an
w:11tiena1 !,0),ODO left to cone up with.
Er ....^11 4 rcf'efring :,ck to ne acl:CA what the fresant
land use was. jens:n answered that it was"open use".
Krwell further quostionnd Jeasen whether the City would be giving
authorised nyyroval to chani111 .:.-t opaaation if they move their
clearances further hack, nnd no refc ...red to the 1o5.nt that SD:Let
of the 11"C people had L,en in favor of erl:.rging the air -,Aort. Jessen
res.,,ondei that it was t1e,ani:h the rne:,;o3tien of the retro Council that
tn allte::tcni their eta thAt Yr. Veyen,
end other r ,,ye:.s,ntativs, did ant r.e.111a.yng the airport because
of the ae:,unt of Cc-:10 - at occurring in"ustrial, and
coa.T.ercial.
1.
6inq
' • 1 : ::a 3 y, a
1. L6q/F3 . 117.:1 ,7tv (oc,ntinued)
Aneerson ahl:ed about the "high lino" area to the east of the pro;:.,,rty and
;11s.t 1;:e , is pemitted. Jenson resrxonded that acceptable 12SC3 are trails,
v:r1,:ir: Jots, etc..
Upton ovod , oecondad by Ratterath, to recornd to the Council
. thlt our :ozition be in b.w.port of the i prcEasing the Wolf Froperty.
F4Toll Gity had aoy irfluence on the rTgation of the
iri•o inid, 6inoe we are the "third party" nrd are cneo ,oraing FA:: to ac-
quire from a private coacorn. Jensen cr.plainad that we do not have any
n 7'Y on not,111 neotiation, but there is a good opportunity for recreation
uses involvod here.
Anerson adied that there is a real need for a recreation area in this part
of the City, and there have been requests from residents about this.
Kruell called the question and the vote was taken. tion carried, with Fruell
a=)stainin ,.
Zerron spoke to the Plnnnini Staff Re'prt of June 9, 1977 and the
tveoneati•ns that te "an'3h fean 'oe ; aid, d provision
of Filray Trail T,V5.,e7-z3 alc th :".*r bouse the
proponal dbos not include any 1Pili in the Park
Systans Plan.
TIcsty Irvine, of Jarip CorpOration, introduced their architact, Dannis
Cri7Y1d, vho s:ake to the plan involving 66 acres containing 146
f77ily units. Ho slid one of .their main Conaorns throu gh the
irojeat is that It1 ..ayi..:sns at a point v%,ire two strco'o of artarial
stail2s o you o ,anot front lots unto the streets. Fe s2oke
in fr of tn.') "caa:1 in llu of land" beause of the rlsec:a.ent Of the
lots.
Ein:rny arrived at 8:15 PI4
Fraell Inas conaernod vIth a anal]. lov oa :Icor Yi,ay 101, vhIch acts
as a draiLazo arca, and v.nftel li%e to ace it ad anothor wc. He
contin..lad that °roe Dell ;:oes throuh, it c ,Inblit%os a crorsing
throur:h Duck L i e Trail nnd ro,-z.es road c:,n7tetion, and after hear—
ins, from other 1:-:112,ts on :all Tri, he 1..s not cc lly convinced
tint Doll Pond Las to ho a four 1 ne ac.n%oating with 101.
Yxs. Irvine responded that rho didn't foal they could change anyonets
rind on that, because it has boon around a long tine.
STATE OF MINNESOTA
STATE PLANNING AGENCY
100 CAPITOL SQUARE BUILDING
550 CEDAR STREET
ST. PAUL, 55101
Environmental Quality Board
November 3, 1977
Christopher Enger
Planning Director
Village of Eden Prairie
8950 Eden Prairie Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55343
RE: Crosstown Industrial Park and Crosstown Park
Dear Mr. Enger:
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to provide our comments on the
above referenced projects. As you are aware, the 1977 Minnesota Environ-
mental Quality Board Rules provide that the local agency is responsible
for determining if an environmental impact statement (EIS) on an industrial
development exceeding 175,000 square feet of industriaJ floor space is
needed.
It is our understanding that two separate applications are currently being
reviewed by the City which are adjacent, serviced by a single access
road, and affect the same geographic area. Minn. Rules 6 MCAR § 3.025
E. Related Actions requires that:
When two or more actions are related, they shall be considered
as a single action and their cumulative potential effects
on the environment shall be considered in determining whether
an EIS is required ...
In order for the City to determine if an EIS is needed on these proposals,
they should be considered collectively. The environmental assessment work-
sheet (EAW) is the proper format for making this determination. Therefore,
It is the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) staff's opinion that these
projects, due to their location, timing, and effects, should be considered
collectively and fall under the mandatory assessment category 6 MCAR 3.025 fhb.
As the Responsible Agency, the City of Eden Prairie would complete the
LAW and distribute in accordance with the enclosed list. An affadavit
of mailing should be attached to the copy of the EAW that is sent to
Mary Sullivan, EQB Administrator.
1)-'12/
"AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER"
Page 2
Upon receipt of the EAW and affadavit of mailing by Mr. Sullivan, the
conclusions of the Responsible Agency on the need for an EIS on the
project, that is a Negative Declaration (no EIS) or Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) preparation notice, will be published in the
EQB Monitor. This usually takes 1-1 11 weeks. Following publication in
the EQB Monitor, there is a 30-day review period of the decision. If
no objections to the decision are made, the decision stands. If ob-
jections are filed, the EQB will review the matter and determine
whether or not an EIS is required.
Please note that if an EAW is required, the Environmental Review Program
Rules state that no final actions to approve or commence an action can
be taken until after the EAW has been reviewed or until the EIS is done,
if one is needed. This ensures that measures needed to minimize environ-
mental impacts, which are discovered during environmental review, can
be included in the project or as permit conditions.
If you have any additional questions on this procedure or the Rules,
please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
eita4-ea .6)4f4r --
Charles R. Kenow, Coordinator
Environmental Review Program
CRK/dh
cc: William Dorigan, EQ8 Special Assistant Attorney General
Tom Rulland, EQB Staff, Technical Representative
Mary Sullivan, EQB Administrator
Donald Pennie, President, Riley Purgatory Creek Watershed District
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 77-145
A RESOLUTION FINDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
WORKSHEET FOR CROSSTOWN INDUSTRIAL PARK AND CROSSTOWN
PARK A PRIVATE ACTION-DOES NOT REQUIRE AN ENVIRONMENTA
L
IMPACT STATEMENT
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie di
d
h
o
l
d
a
p
u
b
l
i
c
hearing on Crosstown Park by Frank Cardarelle on the 4
t
h
d
a
y
o
f
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
,
1977, and
WHEREAS, the City Staff, through meetings with the Envi
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
Quality Board Staff , determined that an Environmental
A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
Worksheet Preparation is mandatory on the Crosstown Ind
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
P
a
r
k
Project together with the Crosstown Park Project by Ric
h
a
r
d
A
n
d
e
r
s
o
n
based on Minnesota Environmental Quality Council Rule 8
.
1
.
b
.
,
a
n
d
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie,as the responsible agen
c
y
,
d
i
d
prepare an Environ,ntal Assessment Worksheet on the ab
o
v
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
dated November 8, 1977, consistent with Rule B.I.b.,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
that an Environmental lifipact Statement is not necessary
f
o
r
t
h
e
Crosstown Industrial Park and Crosstown Park Projects be
c
a
u
s
e
t
h
e
projects are not considered.a major action, do not have
s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
environmental effects and are not more than of local sig
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
c
e
.
ADOPTED, by the Eden Prairie City Council this
15 day of Nova:6er_, 1977.
Wolfgang H. Penzel, Mayor
ATTEST:
John D. Frane, City Clerk SEAL
1)‘
Nov. 8, 1977
MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COUNCIL
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORRSIWET (EAW)
AND NOTICE OF FINDINGS
R ter FT
DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE
E.R. ft
NOTE: The purpose of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is to provide
inforration on a project so that one can assess rapidly whether or not the
project requires an Environmental Impact Statement. Attach additional
pages, charts, maps, etc, as needed to answer these questions. Your
answers should he as specific as possible. Indicate which answers are
estimated.
I. SUMMARY .
A. ACTIVITY PINDING BY RISPONSIBLE AGENCY (PERSON)
*Negative Declaration (No EIS)
D EIS Preparation Notice (EIS Required)
B. AcTimpry IDENTIFICATION
I. Project name cE! titleCrOSStOwn Industrial Park
Crosstown Park
2. Project proposer(s) Mr. Frank Cardarelle Mr, R. Anderson
Address 6440 flying Cloud Drive i 6700 Exc. jUvd.
Eden Prairie, Mn. 55344 : Mpls., Mn. 55416
Telephone Number and Area Code ( 612 941-3030 ! 933-$822
3. Responsible Agency or Person City.ALF.Ltjtirairie____
Address 8950 Eden Prairie Road. Eden Prattle...An-5E144
Person in ReSpmsitle Agency (Person) to contact for further information
on this EAW: Chris Fnger Telephone 941 -9262
4. This EAW and other supporting documentation arc available for public in-
specLion and/or copying at: Location City of Eden Prairie
Telephone 941-2262 Hourt1 8AM-4:30PM
5. Reason for EAR Preparation
Mandatory Category -cite
MEQC Rule number (s) MEOC 81 h 0 Petition D0tr
C. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
1. Project location
County Hennepin City/Townsnip name
Eden Prairie
Township number 116 (North), Range Number 22 Rast or West (circle ens),
Section number(s) . 1 Street address . (if in city) or legal description:
- 1 -
e. Designated Reeve- acres j. Forested
ation/onen Space
15 15 acres
. -
-2- 2 -
2. Type and scope of proposed project: The total project will have 9 office/
warehouse and 3 office buildings on 39.9 acres.
3. Estimated starting date (month/year) Dec 1977
4. Estimated completion date (month/year) NOV. 1982
5. Estimated construction cost $5.000,000.00
6. List any federal funding involved and known
p
e
r
m
i
t
s
o
r
a
p
p
r
o
v
a
l
s
n
e
e
d
e
d
from each unit of government and status of e
a
c
h
:
Unit of Government Name or Type of Permit/Approval Status
(federal, state, or Federal Funding
regional, local)
Nine Mile Watershed approval of erosion cont
r
o
l
p
l
a
n
a
p
p
r
o
v
e
d
District
City of Eden Prairi4 rezoning and platting ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
pending
7. If federal permits, funding or approvals are
i
n
v
o
l
v
e
d
,
w
i
l
l
a
f
e
d
e
r
a
l
E
I
S
be prepared under the National Environmenta
l
P
o
l
i
c
y
NO YES UNKNOWN
II. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTICV
A. Include the following maps or drawings:
1. A map showing the regional location of the
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
.
see p.2b
2. An original 61/2 x 11 section of a U.S.G.S.
71/2 minute, 1:24,000 scale map
with the activity or project area boundaries
a
n
d
s
i
t
e
l
a
y
o
u
t
d
e
l
i
n
e
a
t
e
d
.
Indicate quadrangle sheet name. (Original
U
.
S
.
G
.
t
.
s
h
e
e
t
m
u
s
t
b
e
m
a
i
n
-
tained by Responsible Agency; legible copies may be supplied to other
EAW distribution points.) See p. 2C
3. A sketch map of the site showing location of
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
a
n
d
i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
significant natural features (water bodies
,
r
o
a
d
s
,
e
t
c
)
.
See p.2d
4. Current photos of the site must be maintained
b
y
t
h
e
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
A
g
e
n
c
y
.
Photos need not be sent to other distributi
o
n
p
o
i
n
t
s
.
B. Present land use.
1. Briefly describe the present use of the site
a
n
d
l
a
n
d
s
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
t
o
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
.
The site is Rural vacant land at present wit
h
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
r
e
z
o
n
i
n
g
p
e
n
d
i
n
g
.
Across Flying Cloud Drive to the Southarein
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
u
s
e
s
.
T
h
e
n
o
r
t
h
a
n
d
e
a
s
t
border on US 169/212 and Co. Rd. 18 respecti
v
e
l
y
.
A
c
r
o
s
s
U
S
1
6
9
/
2
1
2
t
o
t
h
e
west and north are a multi-family/office/com
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
P
U
D
a
n
d
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
u
s
e
s
.
2. Indicate the approximate acreages of the si
t
e
that are:
a. Urban developed 0 acres f. Wetlands (Type III, IV, V) 4.7acres
b. Urban vacant _Lacres g. Shoreland ---S12cres
c. Rural developed 0 acres h. Floodplain
d. Rural vacant 20.2 acres i. CroplandePatture land 0 acres
4"."! .....
0.1.101.
I SOM-6)ST
MINNEAPOLIS
CARVER CO
.
... .r.touTH e AST
PAUL
6t....Yob
1•11.1 OMNI I Ot•ot.
.0ARCYVA CO
20 DF/9/75
RAMSEY CO
11110 011.1.
kJ EAPOL IS
OROS. TH .1101
'AUL
blot Ufa..
1.6.•
MINNEAPOt. I
WNW. CO.
tv.
I "I
•••n•
Petal.
....cot.
Y1 ...b. I "Or CO.
dotIrtic s7. PAU r
C.f.i. W.
.1•60.111,
•"
It ONC•00.6.1* 10' •"••••••••.... te 0 ....• n ••• ..
•
......:::.„.1.
• • ...
.
Y1 . O..
O. •••n•••n •••n•••n1 Si 1.1.n •n••• al tom ••••••11 : :•:.•::: •• it al
•
+91144-- County Boundary
Nun-- Municipal tit...unduly
Township laMoulan/
: Ria
:
it
5'326
-2b-
DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK
3i'l'''•"; 0., ° I., —77 r, i', :' 1
T A ;1;1
',,
- 'It ake Cch 'ik.,
--
','-''.. 441 4 • .e.
,
•.
JI
,,:-..
Shady Oak • ' - .pc" ' < - - -• „ -,_:,,.. _.:-.;+! •,e, ct; .
.,,,,...1,7_:-
,•.\
.'s‘. i ' ,.• .( z,•,',"•••-..,,,/-:::-\...,U
1 .'-\--,1 .- a • rj! - - •— -,-- --- -
•
,
,q
e
- :.', • -- r,._
-
-
n -_-
1 ,)' •V
?
-
S\>
. . •
'\,,„\.%
• k 0 ; <--..:: .-•-' 1-:, 1, . 0 ,4 1
'5.0'1,- '. ' -- . 1).`n Shady Oak L-4„...._,A . „',
V*
RI !
— 7 :;•`,4
49A1'47•
54-1-1 1141
••••tr.'!':,t5et-1
.....
AHALT-4‘,7
2d
3. List names and sizes of lakes, rivers and streams on or near the site,
particularly lakes within 1,000 feet and rivers and streams within'
300 feet.
There is a pond of 4.7 acres on the site which can be seen from
Co. Rd. 18
C. Activity Description
1. Describe the proposed activity, including staging of development (if any),
operational characteristics, and major typos of equipment and/or pro-
cesses to be used. Include data that would indicate the magnitude of
the proposed activity (e.g. rate of production, number of customers, tons
of raw materials, etc).
Office and warehouse buildings will be constructed as sales permit
beginning with the construction of three 20,000 sq.ft. warehouse
buildings inuediately. 'Roads and utilities to be constructed in the
Fall of 1977 and Spring 1978. Project completion is estimated Fall '82.
2. Fill in the following where applicable:
a. Total project area 39.9 acres
Or
Length N.A. miles
g. Size of marina and access N.A. sq. ft.
channel (water area)
h. Vehicular traffic trips
generated per day 1 403AoT .
b. Number of housing or
recreational units 0 i. Number of employees 350
(700 according to allowable floor space)
C. Water supply needed 20,000 gaima
maximum Source: City water
d. Number of parking (35,000gal/da according to allowable flo
spaces ' 800 k. Solid waste requiring spa(
proposed disposal proposed-756 tons/yr
e. Amount of dredging mocu. yd. (1533tons/yr allowed by ordinance)
. ' 0 A. Cannercial, retail or
f. Liquid wastes .requir- industrial floor space
ing treatment 1,7,500igal/da office space proposed
proposed
(31,500 gal/da allowed in Ordinance) ordinance allows
III. ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRMMNTAL IMPACT
A. SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY
1. Will the project be built in an area with slopes currently
exceeding 121.? No -X-Y es
2. Are there other geologically unstable areas involved in the project s
such as fault zones, shrink-swell soils, peatlands, or sinkholes? A NO YES
3. If yes on 1 or 2, describe slope conditions or unstable area and any
measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impacts.
Staging of the development will insure that only portions of the site are
disturbed at a time. Erosion control will be implemented as per Nine Mile
Creek Watershed District recommendations and sound floodplain management
practices.
1,0:21
Height of structures 40 ft. J.
180,00q. ft.
- 72,000
330 000 indus.
270,000 off
- 3 -
4. Indicate suitability of site soils for foundations, individual sept
i
c
systems, and ditching, if these are included in the project. •.
See Soils, p. 4b
S. Estimate the total amount of grading and filling which will be done
:
mi_nna_cu. yd. gradingm t nna cu. yd. filling
WNTit-TpC-rcent of the site will be so altered?
6. What will be the maximum finished slopes?
7. What steps will be taken to minimize soil erosion during and
after construction?
. Disturbed areas will be topsoiled, seeded , sodded or landscaped. Temp
o
r
a
r
y
'and permanent erosion control will be implemented according to Nine Mil
e
Watershed District recommendations.
B. VEGETATION
1. Approximately what percent of the site is in each of the following
vegetative types:
Woodlard
35 Cropland/ 0 %
Pasture
Brush or shrubs
4 t Harsh 14 %
Grass or herbaceous 47
Other 0 %
(Specify)
2. Bow many acres of forest or woodland will be cleared, if any? 4 acres
3. Are there any rare or endangered plant species or areas of unique
botanical or biological significance on the sito? • (See DNB publication
.X
The Uncommon ones.) NO YES
If Yes , list Cho species or area and indicate any measures to be used
to reduce potential adverse impact.
See Vegetation, p.4c
C. FISH AND WILDLIFE
1. Are there any designated federal, state or local wildlife or fish manage-
ment areas or sanctuaries near or adjacent to the site? X NO YES
2. Are there any known rare or endangered species of fish and wildlife
on or near the site? (See DNB publication Inie Uncommon X NO YES
Ones.)
3. Will the project alter or eliminate wildlife or fish
NO X YES
habitat?
4. If yes on any of questions 1-3, list the area, species or habitat, and
indicate any measures to be used to reduce potential adverse impact on
them.
See Wildlife, p. 4d
30 e
15 %
fiz..330
SOILS EAW Crosstown Industrial Park/Crosstown,Rark
The soils on the site are made-up mostly of the series Heyder(HeC),
being a sandy loam soil with slopes of 6-12%. Smaller areas of Glencoe
(Cc), Kingsley (KnE), Heyder and Lester(HdF), Hamel(Ha), and Marsh,
(Ma) are intermixed throughout the site. The following is a summary
of the soil conditions on the site (see soils map).
Heyder Sandy Loam (HeC), Heyder and Lester Loam (HdF)
HdF is commonly found on slopes of 24-35%. HeC found on slopes of 6-12 %.
Deep soils, well drained, moderately permeable. Water table below 5'
all seasons, commonly below 10' . Soils have erosive nature especially
on slopes greater than 12%. Fair hearing capacity and shear strength,
moderate shrink-swell. Fairly wide footings are required.
Kingsley Complex (KnE)
Commonly found on slopes of 18-24%. Loamy to sandy texture, moderate to
rapid permeability. Water table below 5 ' all seasons, commonly below
10'. Low shrink-swell, fair to good bearing capacity . Soils are quite
erosive especially on slopes greater than 12%. There is some sand and
gravel found on these soils.
Hamel Loam (Ha)
Soils are deep, loam to clay in texture, poorly drained. Water table 1-3'
in wet seasons. Drain tiles should be installed around foundation footings.
Frost heave is high, bearing capacity is poor to fair. Shrink-swell is
moderate.
Glencoe Silty Clay Loam(Gc), Marsh (Ma)
Very poorly drained, subject to ponding. Sandy to loamy in texture, organic,
poor bearing capacity.
-4h-
,191
VEGETATION
EAW Crosstown Industrial Park/Crosstown
Park
Tree Species
American Elm
Pin Oak
Red Oak
White Oak
Bur Oak
Boxelder
Cottonwood
Silver Maple
Large Tooth Aspen
Trembling Aspen
Lombardy Poplar
Willow
Honeylocust
Pin Cherry
Black Cherry
Green Ash
Cedar
Understory
Smooth Sumac
Greytwig Dogwood
Wild Rose
Buchthorn
Wild Raspberry
Chokecherry
Currant
Hazelbrush
Baneberry
Yellowtwig Dogwood
Lilac
Nannyberry Viburnum
Honeysuckle
Snowberry
Juneberry
Vines
Grape
Greenbriar
Bittersweet
Trees commonly found on the site are Pin Oak, Bur Oak, Honeylocust, Sugar
Maple, Silver Maple, Red Oak, White Oak, American Elm, Large Tooth and
Trembling Aspen, Pin Cherry, Blackcherry, Green Ash, Cedar, Boxelder, Cotton-
wood, and willow with oak being the common species.
Understory indexed on the site are Smooth Sumac, Greydogwood, Wild Rose, Buch-
thorn, Chokeherry, Wild Raspberry, Currant, Hazel Brush, Baneberry, Yellowtwig,
Dogwood, Lilac, Nannyberry, Viburnum, Honeysuckle, Snowberry, Juneberry and
various ferns. 1,141eS2tomme
Vines found are Bittersweet, Greenbriar and grape.
oc,6 1,;6,
Trees suitable for plating on the site for each soil type are as follows:
Heyder and Lester Soils
Black Walnut, Red Pine, White Pine,
Spruce
south & west slopes greater
than 12%
Red Pine, Red Cedar, Jack Pine,
Green Ash
Hamel Soils
Cottonwood, Silver Maple,Black
Walnut
Kingsley Soils
Red Pine, White Pine, White
Spruce,
south & west slopes greater or
than 12%
Red Pine, Jack Pine, Red Cedar,
Glencoe and Marsh Soils
None suitable
-4c-
WILDLIFE EAW Crosstown Industrial Park/Crosstown Park
The wildlife in the area is quite abundant for a site that is quite
developed on its perimeters because of the natural cover, open space
and proximity to water.
Many of the small mammals and birds in the area will be eliminated or
displaced. The amount of food and habitat generally will be reduced,
eliminating the potential to produce wildlife proportionately. Territorial
concerns of certain animals will be disrupted. Changes in microclimate
and the presence of man's environment will probably increase the popula-
tion of certain undesirable species including housemice, Norway Rats,
Starlings and English Sparrows.
In summary, the impact to the wildlife on the site will be negative.
The introduction of noise, increased emissions, decrease in food,
territorial boundaries and man's presence will all influence the decrease.
-4d-
D. HYDROLOGY
1. Will the project include any of the following:
If yes, describe type of work and mitigative measures
to reduce adverse impacts.
a. Drainage or alteration of any lake, pond, marsh,
lowland or groundwater suPPlY
b. Shore protection works, dams, or dikes
c. Dredging or filling operations
d. Channel modifications or diversions
e. Appropriation of ground and/or surface water
NO YES
X
f. Other changes in the course, current or cross-
section of water bodies on or near the site X
2. What percent of the area will be converted to new impervious surface?
3. What measures will be taken to reduce the volume of surface water run-
off and/or treat it to reduce pollutants (sediment, oil, gas, etc.)?
About half of the stormwater will enter existing storm sewer systems .
and half into the existing ponds on the site. Sedimentation ponds and
other sedimentation control devices will be implemented as per Nine Mile
Creek Watershed District recommendations.
4. Will there be encroachment into the regional (100 year) floodplain
ay new fill or structures?- YES •
If yes, does it conform to the local floodplain ordinance? NO N.A.YES
5. What is the approximate minimum depth to groundwater on 540 feet
the site? There are some areas where groundwater is closer to
ground level ' some standing water (see soils summary, p.h) E . WATER QUALITY
1. Will there be a discharge of process or cooling water, sanitary sewage
or other waste Waters to any water body or to groundwater? NO _A_YES
If yes, specify the volume, the concentration of pollutants and the
water body receiving the effluent.
Jict hl process Water
cooling water
-71— sanitary somr(netro Watstemater Treatment Plan to Mn. Moor)
—1— s l7n: gl 'e r *:=d4 D=1 "'" r""°11 "
2. If discharge of waste water to the municipal treatment system is
planned, identify any toxic, corrosive or unusual pollutants
in the wastewater.
None
3. Will any sludges be generated by the proposed project? X NO YES
If yes, specify the expected volume, chemical composition and method
of disposal.
6-93t 1
4. What measures will be used to minimize the volumes or impacts identified
in questions 1-3?
Proper design of storm water drainage to prevent unnecessary discharge
of sediment into existing ponds and other stormoater sewage systems.
5. If the project is or includan a landfill, attach information on soil profile,
depth to water table, and proposed depth of disposal.
F. AIR QUALITY AND NOISE
1. Will the activity cause the emission of any gases and/or particulates
into the atmosphere? NO y YES
If Yes, specify the type and origin of these emissions, indicate any
emission control devices or measures to be used, and specify the approxi-
mate amounts for each emission (at the source) both with and without the
emission control measures or devices.
Engine emission during construction and heating or cooling of buildings.
Automobile and service truck traffic after development.
2. Will noise or vibration be generated by construction and/or operation
of 010 project? NO -X YES
If yes, describe the noise source(s)1 specify decibel levels Cas(.03, and
duration (hrs/da) for each and any mitigative measures to reduce the
noise/vibration. Noise confined to site and should occur Standards for Noise
only during daylight hours. Noise should Day affi
be dissipated at boundary limits .150 1.10 150 110 '
60d8A •65d8A 604118 56d8A
Maximum d RA Ranges: EguiMmt At Machine at 260 feet
'scraper 1717ITS 64-100
dozer 88-105 23-90
motor grader 78. 96 63-81
3. If yes on 1 or 2, specify whether any areas sensitive to noise or
reduced air quality-(hospitals, elderly housing, wilderness, wildlife
areas, residential developments, etc.) are in the affected area and give
distance from source.
A Mult-family residential PUD is planned for location west of the site
across US 169/212. There is also some residential housing to the east of
the site across Co. Rd.18. Neither should be adversely impacted as to air
quality or noise.
G. LAND RESOURCE CONSERVATION, ENERGY
1. Is any of the site suitable for agricultural or forestry production
or currently in such use? NO X YES
If yes, specify the acreage involved, type And volume of marketable crop
or wood produced and the quality of the land for uuch use.
Some of the site is suitable for tree growth but may not be suitable for
commerical forestry production. (see Tree index, p. -4c).
2. Are there any known mineral or peat deposits on the site? X NO YES
If you, Irecify the tyve of deposit and the acreage.
_
3. Will the project result in an increased energy demand? NO x ES
Complete the following as applicable: But if not here, energy demand will
come elsewhere.
a. Energy requirements (oil, electricity, gas, coal, solar, etc.)
PROJECT PROPOSAL
Type
Estimated
Annual
Requirement
Peak Demand
(Dourly or Daily) Anticipated
Supplier
Firm Contract or
Interrutible Banis? Summer Winter
Electric 1,128,000 170kw/hr 310kw/hr NSP firm contract
Natural Gas 22,599mcf/yr 8370cufVh) Minnegasco interruptible
Oil 45,000 gal/yr interruptible
ESTIMATES IF PROJECT WERE BUILT TO FLOOR AREAS ALLOWED BY ORDINANCE
Type
...........—
Annual
Requirement
......,
(Hourly
Summer
...,...--..
or Daily)
Winter
Anticipated
Supplier
Firm contract or
Interruptible Basis?
firm contract Electric 2,487,000KWH 1030Kw/hr 680Kw/hr N S P
Natural Gas 49,830 mcf/yr 18455cuftft Minnegasco interruptible
Oil 99,000gal/yr interruptible
b. Estimate the capacity of all proposed on-site fuel storage. N .A.
c. Estate annual energy distributlon 'ors
space heating
60 % lighting
15 %
air conditioning
20 processing
ventilation
5
d. Specify any major energy conservation systems and/or equipment
incorporated into this project.
Some of the buildings may incorporate energy conservation systems including
solar energy. The buildings will all be insulated to conform to new build-
ing code standards.
e. What secondary energy use effects may result from this project
(e.g. more or longer car trips, induced housinl or businesses, etc)?
The project may increase the length of automobile trips for some time.
Local housing projects for employees may increase energy demands in this
area but relieve the same amount elsewhere.
N. OPEN SFACE/ESCEEATION
1. Arc there any designated federal, state, county or local recreation or
open space areas near the site (including wild and scenic rivers, trails,
lake accesses)? X NO YES
If yes, list areas by name and explain how each may be affected by the
project. Indicate any measures to be used to reduce adverse impacts.
Access to Bryant Lake Park from US 169/212 will be from Shady Oak Road
which will be shared with this project.
Bryant Lake - local/regional park
Nine Mile Creek - desiganted by Metro Council as trail corridor.
II. TRANSPORTATION
1. Will the project affect any existin
g
o
r
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
t
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
systems
(highway, railroad, water, airport,
e
t
c
)
?
NO x YES
If yes, specify which part(s) of the system(s) will be affected. Fo
r
these, specify existing use and capacities, average traffic speed and
percentage of truck traffic (if hig
h
w
a
y
)
;
a
n
d
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
h
o
w
t
h
e
y
w
i
l
l
b
e
affected by the project (e.g. conge
s
t
i
o
n
,
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
t
r
u
c
k
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
,
safety, increased traffic (PDT), ac
c
e
s
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
)
.
See Transportation, p. 8b
2. Is mass transit available to the site?
YES
See Transportation p. 8b
3. What measures, including transit an
d
p
a
r
a
t
r
a
n
s
i
t
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
a
r
e
p
l
a
n
n
e
d
t
o
reduce adverse irpacts?
See Transportation , p.8b
J. PLANNING, LAND USE, COMMUNITY SERV/CES
1. Is the project conscstent with local
a
n
d
/
o
r
r
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
m
p
r
e
h
e
n
s
i
v
e
plans?
NO JES
If not, explain:
The 1968 Comprehensive Guide Plan in
d
i
c
a
t
e
s
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
a
s
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
u
s
e
.
T
h
e
Smetana Lake Sector Study adopted in
1
9
7
4
a
s
a
n
a
m
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
t
o
t
h
e
1
9
6
8
G
u
i
d
e
Plan indicates the areas best use a
s
o
f
f
i
c
e
w
a
r
e
h
o
u
s
e
w
i
t
h
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
W
s
o
m
e
limited commercial,and on the north
s
i
d
e
h
i
g
h
d
e
n
s
i
t
y
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
.
'
If a zoning change or special use permit
i
s
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
,
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
. zoning and change requested.
The properties are currently Rural,
v
a
c
a
n
t
l
a
n
d
.
T
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
i
s
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
for preliminary plat approval and r
e
z
o
n
i
n
g
t
o
1
-
2
P
a
r
k
,
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Z
o
n
i
n
g
.
2. Will the type or height of the proje
c
t
c
o
n
f
l
i
c
t
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
of the
existing neighborhood? YES
If yes, explain and describe any measur
e
s
t
o
be used to reduce conflicts.
The areas surrounding the site for
t
h
e
m
o
s
t
p
a
r
t
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
a
s
i
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
o
r
proposed as commercial, office, mul
t
i
-
f
a
m
i
l
y
d
w
e
l
l
i
n
g
u
n
i
t
s
.
U
S
1
6
9
/
2
1
2
a
n
d
Co.Rd. 18 border the site on the northwest , north and east sides
.
v 3/1
— 0 —
MMNEAPOLO .
1
ZONE I
ZONE S ZONES
1SC."""m 1=CMMESE6"1114
.60
(DE N PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY HO TECH
ZONE 4
.E.. OM. VI
Ev*Vvos wv.
MN 'AMINE SHOVVINO CENTER
III. TRANSPORTATION EAW-CROSSTOWN INDUSTRIAL PARK/CROSSTOWN PARK
H.
1. Highway US 169/212 M
55 mph
8-10% truck traffic
14,300-16,900 ADT
2000 veh/hour/lane maximum
completion of the project could
add about 1000+ ADT to US 169/
212 which is now running at or
bear capacity.
Traffic would enter US 169/212
from Shady Oark Road which is
a controlled diamond inter-
section. US 169/212 is a major
arterial through Eden Prairie.
Co. Rd. 18
55 mph
6-8% truck traffic
7,800-9,200 ADT
2000 veh/hour/lane maximum
Co. Rd. 18 might expect about 400±
additional trips, most of which will
probably be Co.Rd. 18 south. The
intersection of Valley View Road and
Co. Rd. 18 has recently been upgraded.
. 2. Metropolitan Transit Commission's bus 53S, has a route along US 169/212 with
a park-n-ride at Eden Prairie Shopping Center and a stop at Co.Rd. 60 (Valley
View Road) and finally at Tracy and Xerxes in Edina. The possibility exists
that this bus routo may be able to have a stop at Shady Oark Road if there
is enough demand for such a stop. If this stop became part of the route for
53S it would leave the passenger about 1/2 mile from the industrial park.
3. Several transit options exist for Eden Prairie as outlined in the "Transit
Potentials Interim Report". Eden Prairie Center is expected to be the center
of activity in the area so it seems the logical location is plan for several
transit options. These include Coordinated Transfer Service,Park-N-Ride
Service &Car and Van Pooling. Others not necessarily dependent on Eden
Prairie Center as a central location are Fixed Route Deviation and Demand
Responsive Service.
-8b-
3. Bow many employees will move into the area to be near th
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
?
unknown
HOW much new housing will be needed? It is estimated that unknown
It is estimated that this project will induce employees to move
t
o
t
h
e
area as well as increase the housing market.
4. Will the project induce development nearby—either supp
o
r
t
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
or similar developments?
If yes, explain type of development and specify any othe
r
c
o
u
n
t
i
e
s
a
n
d
municipalities affected.
The project may induce housing projects, in turn which may be t
h
e
c
a
t
a
l
y
s
t
for developing additional commercial projects to serve them.
5. Is there sufficient capacity in the following public servic
e
s
t
o
h
a
n
d
l
e
the project and any associated growth?
Amount required
Public Service
for nroicct
S ffic
Water 50 gal/person gal/da yes
wastewater treatment 50 gal/person gal/da yes
sewer 3,650 feet
N.A. pupils
_yes
N.A. schools
solid waste ,llsposal 63 ton/mo yes
streets 3 miles yes
other (police, fire, etc) . no additional _____yes -
If current major public facilities are not adequate, do
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
l
o
c
a
l
plans call for expansion, or is expansion necessary s
t
r
i
c
t
l
y
f
o
r
t
h
i
s
one project and its associated impacts?
Expansion is necessary for this and other projects. The project
i
s
c
o
n
s
i
s
-
tent with city plans_
6. Is the project within a proposad or designated Critical
A
r
e
a
o
r
p
a
r
t
of a Related Actions EIS or other environmentally sensi
t
i
v
e
p
l
a
n
o
r
program reviewed by the EQC? x_ro YES
If yes, specify which area or plan.
7. Will the project involve the use, transportation, stora
g
e
,
r
e
l
e
a
s
e
or disposal of potentially hazardous or toxic liquids,
s
o
l
i
d
s
o
n
gageous substances such as pesticides, radioactive was
t
e
s
,
p
o
i
s
i
o
n
s
,
etc? X NO YES
If yes, please specify the substance and rate of usage an
d
a
n
y
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
to be taken to minimize adverse environmental impacts f
r
o
m
a
c
c
i
d
e
n
t
s
.
"9-
O. When the project has served its useful life, will reti
r
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
facility require special measures or plans?
X
N
O
Y
C
S
If yes, specifyi
X % HISTORIC RESOURCES
1. Are there any structures on the site older than 50 yea
X
rs or on federal
or state historical registers? NO YES
2. Have any arrowheads, pottery or other evidence of prehistoric or e
a
r
l
y
settlement been found on the site? x NO YES
Hight any known archaeologic or paleontological sites be a
f
f
e
c
t
e
d
by the activity? ....A—P° YES
Careful construction consistent with erosion control plan
s
w
i
l
l
a
l
l
o
w
e
a
r
l
y
detection of any unexpected archaelogical sites.
3. List any site or structure identified in 1 and 2 and expl
a
i
n
a
n
y
impact on them.
None
L. OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
Describe any other major environmental effects which may n
o
t
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
identified in the previous sections.
None
II/. OTHER MITIGATIVE MEASURES
Briefly describe mitigative measures proposed to reduce or
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
adverse impacts that have not been described before.
City staff review of all public facilities and:utilibt; bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
p
e
r
m
i
t
s
,
etc.
City staff field inspection of all public works constructio
n
.
- ..
V. FINDINGS
The project is a private (x ) governmental (
)
a
c
t
i
o
n
.
T
h
e
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
A
g
e
n
c
y
(Person), after consideration of the informati
o
n
i
n
t
h
i
s
E
A
W
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
f
a
c
t
o
r
s
in Minn. Reg. MBQC 25, makes the following fin
d
i
n
g
s
.
I. The project is ( ) is not ( 4 ) a major action.
Stab, rcasons:
See p. lib
2. The project does ( ) does not (X ) have the potential for sign
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
environmental effects.
State reasons:
See p. lib
3. (For private actions only.) The project is
(
)
i
s
n
o
t
(
)
(
)
o
f
m
o
r
e
t
h
a
n
local significance.
State Reasons:
See p. 111.
TV. CONCLUSIONS AND CERTIFICATION
NOTE: A Negative Declaration or EIS Preparatio
n
N
o
t
i
c
e
i
s
n
o
t
o
f
f
i
c
i
a
l
l
y
f
i
l
e
d
until the date of publication of the notice in
the ROC Monitor section of
the Minnesota State Register. Submittal of the
R
A
W
t
o
t
h
e
E
Q
C
c
o
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e
s
a request for publication Of notice in the
Monitor.
A. I, the undertigned, am either the authorized repr
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
v
e
o
f
t
h
e
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
Agency or the Responsible Person identified bel
o
w
.
B
a
s
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
a
b
o
v
e
f
i
n
d
i
n
g
s
,
the Responsible Agency (Person) makes the following conclusions. (Co
m
p
l
e
t
e
either 1 or 2).
1. at_ NMATIVE DECLANATION NOTICE
No LIS is needed on this project, because the project
i
s
n
o
t
a
major action and/or does not have the potential for signif
i
c
a
n
t
environmental effects and/or, for private acti
o
n
s
o
n
l
y
,
t
h
e
project is not of More than local significance
.
160
IP i
11-
V. FINDINGS EAW CROSSTOWN INDUSTRIAL PARK/CROSSTOWN PARK
1. The project is in an industrial area and has been designated for
Industrial and related uses in the 1968 Guide Plan and the 1974
Smetana Lake Sector Study. Municipal services such as sewer and
water will be extended to the site as will natural gas and power.
Other municipal services such as policeand fire protection, transpor-
tation systems are being planned as capacities warrant. The project
Is consistent with urban development standards and growth plans of
the City.
2. The site will require grading of many of the slopes to accommodate
building and parking pads. The ponding areas on the site will remain
Intact and with proper drainage engineering should retain their
present characteristics. The site is bordered on the northwest ,
. north and east sides by 169/212 and Co.Rd. 18.
3. The development will be characterized by low key office and office/
warehouse uses, maintaining much of the natural landforms and tree
stands. The project will respect the natural hydrologic system -and is
Consistent with City growth plans, therefore, it is of no more than
local significance.
-11b-
510-
2. EIS PVEPARATION NOTICE
An EIS will be prepared on this project because the projec
t
i
s
a
major action and has tne potential for significant en
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
effects. For private actions, the project is also of
m
o
r
e
t
h
a
n
local significance.
a. The VEX Rules provide that physical construction or o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
project must stop when an IS is required. In special
c
i
r
c
u
m
s
t
a
n
c
e
s
.
the MWC calspecifically authorize limited construction to begin or
continue. If you feel there are special circumstance
s
i
n
t
h
i
s
project, specify the extent of progress recommended a
n
d
t
h
e
r
e
a
s
o
n
s
.
b. Date Draft EIS will be submitted:
(month) (day) (year)
(NEQC Rule: require that the Draft EIS be submitted
within 120 days
of publication of the EIS Preparation Notice in the E
Q
C
Monitor. If
special circumstances prevent compliance with this ti
m
e
l
i
m
i
t
,
a
.
written request for extension explaining the reasons
f
o
r
t
h
e
r
e
q
u
e
s
t
must be submitted to the EQC Chairman.)
c. The Draft EIS will be prepared by (list Responsible A
g
e
n
c
y
(
s
)
o
r
Person(s)):
Signature
Title
Date
B. Attach an affidavit certifying the date that copies o
f
t
h
i
s
E
A
W
w
e
r
e
m
a
i
l
e
d
to all points on the official EQC distribution list, t
o
t
h
e
c
i
t
y
a
n
d
c
o
u
n
t
y
directly impacted, and to adjacent counties or munici
p
a
l
i
t
i
e
s
l
i
k
e
l
y
t
o
b
e
directly impacted by the proposed action (refnr to qu
e
s
t
i
o
n
I
I
I
.
J
.
4
o
n
p
a
g
e
9
of the LAW). The affidavit need be attached only to
t
h
e
C
o
p
y
o
f
t
h
e
E
M
which is tent to the EQC.
C. Billing procedures for Inc Monitor Publication
State agency
ONLY:
Attach to the EAW sent to the EQC a completed OSR 100
form (State Register General Order Form—available at
C
e
n
t
r
a
l
Stores). For Instructions, please contact your Agenc
y
'
s
Liaison Officer to the state Register or the Office o
f
t
h
e
State Register—(612) 29G-0219.
'12-
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor Penzel and Members of the City Council
Roger Ulstad, City Manager
Carl Jullie, City Engineer
November 10, 1977
T.H. 169-Co. Rd. 1 Improvement
SP 2744 -28
The preliminary plans for traffic signals at the junction of T.H. 169
and County Road I have been completed by the Minnesota Department of
Transportation and submitted to the City for approval. A copy of the
plans is available for review in the Engineering Department Office.
We will notify by mail the property owners involved in the project
that the Council will bc considering approval of the preliminary plans.
A representative from the Department of Transportation will be present
to answer questions about the plans. Approval of the preliminary plans
by the City Council will require adoption of Resolution No. 77-148.
CJJ:kh
51/6
Mn/DOT 2521 (4177) CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION No. 77-148
At a (regular) (special) meeting
o
f
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
C
o
u
n
c
i
l
o
f
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
o
f
Eden Prairie duly held on the .day of 19 27_,
the following Resolution was offer
e
d
b
y
seconded by
; to-wit:
WHEREAS the Commissioner of the D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
o
f
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
h
a
s
prepared preliminary plans for the
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
a
p
a
r
t
o
f
T
r
u
n
k
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
renumbered as Trunk Highway No. 169
within
the corporate limits of the City o
f
Eden Prairie , from= 0.5 mile south
to 0.5 mi. Tc:). of C.S.A.H. 1 ; and
WHEREAS said preliminery plans are
o
n
f
i
l
e
i
n
t
h
e
O
f
f
i
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
Department of Transportation, Sain
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
i
n
n
e
s
o
t
a
,
b
e
i
n
g
m
a
r
k
e
d
,
l
a
b
e
l
e
d
,
a
n
d
identified as Layout No. IB S.P. 2744-28 (169=5)
f
r
o
m
0
.
5
m
i
l
e
S
o
u
t
h
t
o
0
.
5
mile North of C.S.A.H. 1
and
WHEREAS copies of said preliminary plans as so marked, la
b
e
l
e
d
,
and
identified are also on file in the
O
f
f
i
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
C
l
e
r
k
;
a
n
d
WHEREAS the term "said preliminar
y
plans" as hereinafter used in
the body of this resolution shall
b
e
d
e
e
m
e
d
a
n
d
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
t
o
mean, refer to,
and to incorporate the preliminary
p
l
a
n
s
a
s
i
n
t
h
e
f
o
r
e
g
o
i
n
g
r
e
c
i
t
a
l
s
particularly identified and descri
b
e
d
;
NOW, THEN, BE IT RESOLVED that sai
d
p
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
p
l
a
n
s
f
o
r
t
h
e
.
improvement of Trunk Highway Numb
e
r
5
renumbd red Trunk Highway Number
169 within the limits of the City of
Eden Prairie
be and hereby are approved.
Number
5
Mn/D4T 2521 (4/77)
Upon the call of the roll the following voted in
favor of the Resolution
The following voted against its adoption:
whereupon the Mayor and presiding officer declared the Resolution adopt
e
d
.
Dated , 19 77 •
Mayor
Attest
City Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) as.
COUNTTOF H-nnerin
)
CITY OF Eden Prairie
I do hereby certify that at a regular meeting (at a special meeting of
which due and legal notice was given) of the City Council of Fden Prairie
Minnesota, on the day of , 19 77 , at which a majority of
the members of said Council were present, the foregoing resolution was a
d
o
p
t
e
d
.
Given under my hand and seal this day of , 19 77
City Clerk
-11
TO: Mayor Penzel and Members of the City Council
THROUGH: Roger Ulstad, City Manager
PROM: Carl Jullie, City Engineer
DATE: November 10, 1977
SUBJECT: Lake Eden South
Acceptance of Utilities
Westwood Planning and Engineering Co., in a letter dated Oct. 27, 1977
,
has certified that the construction of municipal sanitary sewer, water
-
main and storm sewer has been completed for Lake Eden South (location
map attached), in accordance with City approved plans and specifica-
tions. The city Engineering staff has made a final inspection of
these utilities and it is recommended that the City Council accept fo
r
continuous ownership and maintenance the sanitary sewer, watermain an
d
storm sewer in the Lake Eden South Addition, subject to a two year
maibi.enance bond commencing November 14, 19 77 .
CJJ:kh
59qt
WESTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMPANY
October 27, 1977
City of Eden Prairie
8950 County Road 4
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55343
Attention: Con l Jullie, P.E.
Director of Public Works
Gentlemen:
Construction of sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer
has been completed for 7717 Corporation's Lake Eden South.
See attached "Final Inspection Form."
This letter is to certify that the construction of the storm
sewer nnd utilities for Lake Eden South was done in accordance
with plans and specifications approved by Eden Prairie. A
maintenance bond will be forwarded to your office by Northdole
Construction Company, Inc. shortly.
We respectfully request that Eden Prairie accept these facilities
for continued maintenance.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me.
Sincerely,
WESTWOOD PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMPANY
enCte..",.-t-.' • -)L2—n
Francis D. Hagen, Sr./.E.
FDH:ss
Enclosure
cc: Northdole Construction Company, Inc.
re t *no' $4^0• Se.. 440 11.02a0etne N.* ON lab
4.4AJ,7106at 0.40:: el IA A/ .4g. cle 1 :Yet 61 lie kr. As ihr eet4.1 14,0
44R /V.as glivog J (mitten, 7/f'S 77,e/e, e
nii NI! /41S WAS:41 A 14A ot 1,A1+11 1I1N14 A/1g IS $.104/41 .411A Ss4A. 44,1,.1%41.u1Ss
LAKE - _ -
5 \ s••j*
v * 200
SAS. Sev.vok
• OirrtR MA 0,1 n•nn•n
&Os" 540 44. -, •
TO: Mayor Penzel and Members of the City Council
THROUGH: Roger Ulstad, City Manager
PROM: Carl Jullie, City Engineer
DATE: November 10, 1977
SUBJECT: Easement to Minnesota Gas Company
MPL Property
The attached easement grant to the Minnesota Gas Company is required
for the relocation of a pressure reducing valve located on Leona Road
just east of T.H. 169. The Minnesota Protective Life Insurance Com-
pany consialrs the valve apparatus as an unsightly detraction from
their buidling and has made arrangements with the gas company to move
the valve at no cost to the City. The City is a signatory on the ease-
mentfbrm because of the ownership structure under the municipal indus-
trial revenue bond financing arrangements for MPL.
CJJ:kh
• EASEInENT
TO MINNESOTA GAS COMPANY
THIS INDENTURE, made this day of 19
by and between City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota Political Subdivision
and Municipal Corporation
*idle County of liennep in
State of
Minnesota
hereinafter called 'GRANTOR," and &Ignite:eta Gas Company.. Delaware corporation, heieinafter called
"GRANTEE."
I. GRANTOR, in consideration of the sum of One Dollat (51.00) and other good and
valuable consideration to GRANTOR in hand paid by GRANTEE. the receipt of which it hereby acknowledged.
•
does hereby grant to GRANTEE, Its successors and assign, forever. the perpetual right and easement at all times
to construct, operate, maintain. thee, tephice and femme faS transmission and/or distribution pipelines, and pipe.
• line facilities (hereinafter called "gas facilities") In, under and upon the following described memises In the
City
of Eden' Prairie County of Hennepin
State of Minnesota:
A •trip of land 15 feet in width in. under and upon part of Lot 1,
Block 1, Leona Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof,
the center line of said 15 foot strip of land being described as
follows;
Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Lot 1, Block 1; thence
East along the South line therelf m ,,tatelne of 15 feet; thence
Northeasterly, deflecting to the left 45 degrees, a distance of
20 feet; thence Northwesterly, deflecting to the left 90 degrees;
• distance of 22 feet and there terminating
as shown on the attached plat which is hereby incorporated by eeferettee and made a part hereof. The aforesaid
grant of easement shall include the tight to GRANTEE to use GRANTOR'S *boning property for the purpose
damns to the premises with the privilege of temporarily placing tools, equipment, material and din thereon
for the purposes betelothefore expressed.
•••nn•n,.
Page 2
2. GRAh'TOR does heteby covenant that GRANTCR Is wen wined in fee of the
premises shove &scribed and has legal title thereto and has the tight, without restriction, to execute and
deliver rids imtrument.
3. GRANTOR agrees that the premises Mail not be encroached upon by filling. excava. •
don, Med& of buildings or permanent MelOglICS whiTh would in ter fete with the gas fac &its located therein or
which would otherwise obstruct access &moo in any manner whatwevet; provided, however, that GRANTOR shall
have the right to use the sot face of the prcatises rot gardens. shrubs, landicepkig, curbing, rums, sidewalks and
paving provided that such use by GRANTOR does not Intel fere with die rights given by GRANTOR to GRANTEE
tome du premises for the purposes herein 'missed.
4. In the event that use of the vas facilities is at any titan discontinued by GRANTEE,
GRANTEE shall have the tight. but not the duty, to enter upon the premises and remove allot any portion of the
pa facilities which have been placed un the premises by GRANTEE.
S. The tenon and thrivisions of this instilment shall IVO with the premises and with the
land apputtenam thereto and shall extend to and be binding upon GRANTOR. GRANTOR'S heirs, personal
representatives, successors, and assigns. City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota
Political Subdivision and Municipal
Corporation
It*
.. Its
STATE or MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this_ day of 19
by
Monty Public
County, Minnesota
UY COMMIS/30R expiter
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF ITEM EPIN
The foregoing imtnunent wav seknowk•dged below me this day of 19 .
by of City of Edon Prairie.
a Minnesota Political Subdivision ,a Municipal
corpotation. on behalf of the corporation.
Notary Public
County. Minnesota
cornadsoort expires:
•
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY MINNESOTA C An COIIPANY, 73) MARQUETTE AVE., IIIMMEAPOI IS. AUNKESOTA SS402
AMA 27
kme: r=59 1
rtial
November 15, 1977
STATE OF MINNESOTA
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The following accounts were audited and allowed as follows:
10-26-77 7360 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. Beer for liquor store 100.00
7361 ED PHILLIPS & SONS Liquor 1,207.09
7362 INSTY PRINTS Printing service-Community Services 8.40
7363 GLEN LAKE BAKERY Cookies for grand opening of
Liquor Store 47.30
10-28-77 7364 QUALITY WINE COMPANY Wine 717.38
11-01-77 7365 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT Employees withheld and employer
ASSN. contribution 10-28 payroll 5,305.66
7366 UNITED WAY Donations withheld 10-28 payroll 18.01
7367 FEDERAL RESERVE BANK Taxes withheld 10-28 payroll 5,896.88
7368 STATE OF MINNESOTA Taxes withheld for October 5,822.58
7369 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Workshop for Walter Johnson 105.00
7370 HOPKINS POSTMASTER Guide Plan mailing 51.37
7371 ED PHILLIPS & SONS Liquor 1,340.66
7372 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO., INC. Liquor 1,061.59
7373 JOHNSON WINE COMPANY Wine 385.24
7374 TWIN CITY WINE CO. Wine 171.60
11-03-77 7375 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. Liquor 559.72
7376 PEliY CASH Reimbursement of fund 43.53
11-04-77 7377 HOPKINS POSTMASTER November and December postage
for mailing "Happenings" 287.48
7378 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. Liquor 865.99
7379 TWIN CITY WINE CO, Wine 59.92
7380 QUALITY WINE CO. Wine 239.92
7381 GRIGGS, COOPER & CO. Liquor 852.75
7382 ED PHILLIPS & SONS Liquor 1,394.30
7383 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF
BUILDING OFFICIALS Book-Bldg. dept. 56.00
11-11-77 7384 ASTLEFORD EQUIPMENT CO. Equipment parts 58.23
7385 ACTION REDDY RENTS Equipment rental-Community Develop-
ment project $30 and Water dept.
$21 51.00
7386 A & H WELDING & MFG. Repair chair-Public Safety dept. 4.00
7387 EARL F. ANDERSEN & ASSOC. Traffic signs 46.80
7388 AWARDS, INC. Plaques for office 127.25
7389 PAUL BROWN Football official services 250.00
7390 BRAUER & ASSOC., INC. Services-Guide Plan update 4,322.73
7391 BATTERY AND TIRE WAREHOUSE Oil and equipment parts 190.98
7392 BRUNSON INSTRUMENT CO. Equipment rental-Preserve Park
Community Development project 100.00
7393 BURY & CARLSON, INC. Sand-snow and ice control 766.32
7394 BUSINESS FURNITURE, INC. File cabinet-Assessing dept. 206.91
7395 COMMUNITY EDUCATIONAL SERVICES Rental of football field 157.50
7396 CLUTCH & U-JOINT Equipment parts 271.14
7397 THOMAS L. CARMODY Services-City Hall addition 5,440.00
7398 CASH REGISTER SALES, INC. Cash registers and supplies for
liquor store 2,737.12
7399 CARGILL SALT Salt-snow and ice control 1,313.03
7400 CADILLAC PLASTIC
Supplies-Water dept. 11.98
November 15, 1977
11-11-77 7401 DAVIES WATER EQUIP. ,Co.
7402 CHRIS ENGER
7403 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY
7404 EDEN PRAIRIE VOLUNTEER FIRE
RELIEF ASSOC.
7405 EMMER DISTRIBUTION CENTERS
• 7406 ECKLUND & SWEDLUND
7407 EUTECTIC + CASTOLIN
7408 EDEN PRAIRIE NEWS
7409 STUART FOX
7410 ANTHONY FIORENTINO
7411 DALE GREEN CO.
7412 GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
7413 GOLD MEDAL BEVERAGE CO.
7414 GLIDDEN PAINT
7415 HENNEPIN COUNTY
7416 MARK HURD AERIAL SURVEYS
7417 HENNEPIN COUNTY
Pipe & cable locator and Leak
locator-Water dept.
Mileage-Planning dept.
First aid kits-Community Services
dept.
Retirement fund payment
Trees-Park Maint.
Work on Liquor store front
Welding supplies-Public Safety
Subscription for Public Safety
Mileage-Tree Disease dept.
Postage for returning films for
gun safety program
Sod-Park Maint.
Radio repairs-Fire dept.
Pop for resale-Teen Center
Paint-Park Maint.
Board for prisoners
Topographic mapping
Supplies-Preserve Park Community
Development
592.08
14.55
27.45
13,827.35
1,472.20
5,925.64
200.20
8.50
67.50
5.93
22.00
35.00
17.50
20.36
312.00
775.00
19.39
7418 INTERNATIONAL CITY MANAGEMENT
ASSOC. Book-Park dept.
7419 ITASCA EQUIPMENT CO. Equipment parts
7420 JEA!! JOHNSON Mileage-Planning dept.
7421 MARK JOHNSTON Mileage-CETA program
7422 JULIE JOHNSON Services-serving coffee at Liquor
6.50
12.85
8.85
45.30
25.00
189.24
6,698.00
282.02
172.95
1,100.05
680.00
20.06
32.50
6,829.58
66.40
757.98
238.00
640.00
28.00
217.00
247.74
1,042.50
7423 EDEN PRAIRIE NEWS .
7424 G. G. KRANZ & SONS, INC.
7425 KARULF HARDWARE
7426 KRAEMER'S HARDWARE
7427 LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFORMATION
SYSTEMS
7428 LUND PAINTING & DECORATING, INC.
7429 LUND PAINT & DECORATING, INC.
7430 LANDCO EQUIPMENT, INC.
7431 M. E. LANE, INC.
7432 LEEF BROS., INC.
7433 MEDCENTER HEALTH PLAN
7434 ROYAL MCFARLAND
7435 W. R. MCNAUGHTAN
7436 STATE OF MINNESOTA
7437 MERIT PRINTING
7438 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP.
7439 MCKAY NURSERY CO.
7440 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL
COMMISSION
7441 3M BUSINESS PRODUCTS
7442 MILLER DAVIS COMPANY
7443 METRO PRINTING, INC.
7444 MODERN TIRE CO.
7445 NATIONAL RECREATION & PARK
ASSOC.
Store grand opening
Oct. legal ads
Services-City Hall addition
Hose, cement, MNTO supplies
Maintenance supplies
Sept. services
Services on woodwork and walls
at Liquor Store
Paint for Liquor Store
Hoses and fittings-Tree Disease
Insurance
Rugs
November insurance
Football official services
Services-Bldg. dept.
Auto plates
Inspection forms-Bldg. dept.
Asphalt-Street Maint.
Trees-Tree Disease dept.
Dec. sewer service charges 13,076.47
Copy machine-Public Safety dept. 113.00
Printed forms-Assessing dept. 11.00
Printed forms and letter heads 377.00
Tire repairs 94.51
Leisure Education Curriculum kit
for Community services dept.
75.00
November 15, 1977
11-11-77 7446 NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK
7447 RATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK
AS
Bond payment
115,241.25
Renewal to magazine-Community
services dept. 20.00
7448 NORTHWESTERN BELL Services 308.74
7449 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. Services 45.54
7450 PHYSICIANS HEALTH PLAN November insurance 3,243.42
7451 W. G. PEARSON, INC. Rock-Street Maint. 129.28
7452 PEPSI-COLA CO. Pop for machine 143.00
7453 GINO RODRIQUEZ Football lineman services 16.00
7454 RIEKE-CARROLL-MULLER Services-Round Lake survey 932.88
7455 DON STREICHER GUNS, INC. Ammunition-Public Safety dept. 81.25
7456 STATE OF MINNESOTA Liquor identification card 5.00
7457 DAVE SALENTINE Football lineman services 42.00
7458 SUN NEWSPAPERS Ad for janitor 25.00
7459 DONNA STANLEY October services 75.25
7460 SHAKOPEE SPORTS CENTER Supplies-Bryant Lake beach 19.20
7461 ST. PAUL STAMP WORKS, INC. Dog tags 75.39
7462 GORDON SMITH CO. Fuel and oil for equipment 1,690.52
7463 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES, INC. Portable restrooms 172.50
7464 SUBURBAN AUTO ELECTRIC Equipment parts 10.79
7465 TWIN CITIES CHAPTER OF YOUNG ,
AUDIENCES Services and labels 150.00
7466 TWIN CITY PRICING & LABEL, INC. Label gun-Liquor Store 181.75
7467 STEPHEN TARGESON Survey services-Preserve Park
Community Development 156.00
7468 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Course for Terri Anderson-Public
Safety dept. 35.00
7469 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Film rental-Fire dept. 3.00
7470 VANS PINES, INC. . Ground cover-Prairie View Park
Development 125.00
7471 VAUGHN'S Flag-City Hall 128.50
7472 VIKING AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER Refund on overcharge on sprinkler
permit
7473 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER Combustible gas detector-Water
dept. 645.00
7474 VALLEY HILL NURSERIES Trees-Tree Disease dept. 7,723.60
7475 VILLAGE CHEVROLET Exhaust pipe 47.66
7476 VALLEY EQUIPMENT CO. Equipment parts 9.57
7477 WESTERN LIFE INSURANCE November insurance 696.32
7478 WILLIAM J. ADVERTISING ASSN. Grand opening campaign for Liquor
Store 475.22
Meters and repair parts-Water dept.1,234.20
Football official services 238.00
Portable restrooms 51.95
Services 6.33
Services 12.01
October expenses 113.60
Services-Crime Prevention Grant 6.95
Guide Plan mailing 17.62
October dues withheld 165.00
Services-Scenic Heights upgrading 8,938.54
10.00 ,
7479 WATER PRODUCTS CO.
7480 JERRY ZAHN
7481 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES
7482 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO.
7483 NORTHWESTERN BELL
7484 JOHN FRANE
7485 INSTY PRINTS
7486 HOPKINS POSTMASTER
7487 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING
ENGINEERS
7488 BRAUER & ASSOCIATES, INC.
November 15, 1977
11-11-77 7489 CHASE BRACKETT COMPANY Appraisal services for 15
parcels-Parks
7490 FUTURE PUBLICATION, INC. Supplies for football-Community
services dept.
7491 HALBAKER COMPANY Install curb for roof AC unit at
Liquor Store
7492 MARTY JESSEN Oct. expenses
7493 PRAIRIE VILLAGE MALL ASSOC. November rent-Liquor Store
7494 RIEKE-CARROLL-MOLLER ASSOC. Services-Forest Knolls 2nd,
Eden View 1, Stewart Highlands,
and Homeward Hills Rd. Imp.
7495 SWEDLUND S&W Sewer service extended to Giese
property line
7496 SANDY WERTS Sept. and Oct. expenses
7497 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER Firearm safety registrations
7498 CAROLYN CASSOLA Guitar instructions
7499 ORS CONSTRUCTION, INC. Contract-Est. No. 6-Stewart
Highlands
7500 M. G. ASTLEFORD CO., INC. Contract-Est. No. 5-Preserve
Blvd.
7501 PROGRESSIVE CONTRACTORS, INC. Contract-Est. No. 5-TH169
Schooner Blvd.-494
7502 ARTEKA, INC. Shrubs for City Hall
7503 HOPKINS POSTMASTER Mailing utility bills
7504 JOHNSON WINE COMPANY Wine
7505 MCNAMARA-VIVANT CONTRACTING CO. Est. No. 1-Scenic Heights Road
7506 NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK Bond payment
TOTAL
1,500.00
37.90
320.00
100.00
1,002.
10,267.37
720.00
52.67
62.00
774.00
9,696.17
12,675.35
118,726.50
114.00
47.97
358.67
33,509.70
177 753.75
610,250.27
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
CLERK'S LICENSE APPLICATION LIST
Novomber 15, 1977
CCNTRACTOR (Molti-fainiAy & Comm)
'Cedo Builders
Cornell Corporation
Stratton-Nielsen Co.
CONTRACTOR (1 & 2 Family)
Imker Construction
Mon-son's, Trc.
Shaffer Construction, Inc.
PIEYr):NG
Ener;s; Systems, Inc.
Northern Plumbing Inc.
Dale Sorensen Company, Inc.
BEATING & V‘-'111T1'.TING
Energy Systems, Inc.
These licen,7es have been approved by the department head responsible
for the licensA activity.
Rebecca gaernomoen, Deputy Clerk